Campbell & Gray’s “The Role of Chevron Deference in Federal Privacy Regulation”

Campbell, R., & Gray, S. (2024, April). The role of Chevron deference in federal … Future of Privacy Forum. https://fpf.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/FPF-Issue-Brief-Chevron-Deference-April-2024.pdf

For 40 years, the Supreme Court’s federal regulatory jurisprudence has been governed by the Chevron Doctrine. In 1984, the Court gave federal agencies deference to reasonably interpret vague laws and statutes. This precedent held until it was called into question and overturned in the Court’s 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.

In the time between oral arguments and the announcement of the Court’s opinion in Loper, Ryan Campbell and Stacey Gray, writing for the Future of Privacy Forum, provide an analysis of the implications of the Loper decision on Chevron precedent in “The Role of Chevron Deference in Federal Privacy Regulation”. Campbell and Gray argue that absent Chevron deference, agencies like the FTC will not have the necessary latitude to effectively regulate AI and disrupt Congress’s ability to draft applicable statutes. While this law review article predated the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Chevron, it predicts the ramifications of what would be the Court’s decision. In the context of developing AI technologies and regulations, it provides a barrier to crafting applicable regulations and legislation.

Throughout the semester, my classmates and I have called for increased regulation of AI. The review of the Chevron and Loper decisions provides insight into how and to what extent the government can regulate AI.