Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) found herself in an awkward position during a recent House hearing with EPA Administrator Michael Regan, where her understanding of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Chevron deference was called into question.
Known for her outspoken conservative views, Boebert challenged Regan on whether the EPA would rescind what she labeled as “unconstitutional regulations” imposed by what she described as “rogue bureaucrats.” However, Regan swiftly turned the tables, asking Boebert if she grasped the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision that overturned the Chevron deference.
“Do you understand the ruling?” Regan asked her.
The tension escalated when Boebert attempted to deflect by questioning Regan’s own understanding of the ruling, saying: Boebert asked him the same question: “Do you understand the ruling of the Supreme Court?”
Regan calmly rebuffed her attempt, pointing out that her question was “ill-formed.”
The Chevron deference, previously allowing agencies leeway in interpreting ambiguous laws to create regulations, has been replaced by a stricter standard requiring judges to apply their own legal interpretations.
In practice, this gave agencies, including the EPA, some latitude to issue federal regulations based on their understanding of statutes. The decision to overturn the doctrine tells judges to instead abide by their own interpretation of the law when assessing legal challenges to an agency action.
The ruling does not block any particular regulations or directly prohibit agency activities. Additionally, the Supreme Court’s decision affirmed that regulations previously supported under the Chevron deference should remain in effect.
Boebert’s discomfort during the exchange starkly underscored her profound lack of understanding to discuss complex legal matters in a high-profile congressional setting.
Watch the exchange below:
Yikes… Boebert just walked into a fact check by Goldman pic.twitter.com/WSPwSbyyJE
— Acyn (@Acyn) July 10, 2024
