Quinn LiPuma is a junior majoring in Political Theory and Constitutional Democracy in MSU’s James Madison College. During his summer internship with WCDP, Quinn will write short explanatory pieces for us about the Heritage Foundation’s terrifying but little-understood blueprint for American fascism, titled Project 2025. This is the fourth piece in Quinn’s series.
Last month, the Supreme Court, one third of which was appointed by Donald Trump, voted along party lines to overturn what was known as the “Chevron Doctrine”, a 1984 decision that gave federal agencies broad protection to enforce federal statutes, even if the wording of those statutes was vague in nature. It was used to ensure that the enforcement of congressional statutes that are vital to the work of the federal government were enforced by those who best knew what the government needed. Project 2025’s disdain for administration is well documented, as mentioned in previous installments of this series. In overruling Chevron, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that any ambiguous rule or statute must go through the courts, not federal administrative agencies, for interpretation. This takes the ability to make the government function, the principal job of the Executive Branch, out of the hands of those who know how to make it function and replaces it with congressionally appointed judges who more than likely do not have expertise in what is required in the day to day functioning of the Executive Branch. In other words, The U.S. Supreme Court, motivated by the disgust for administration in a like manner to the promoters of Project 2025, issued the ruling that any question regarding statutes that Congress decides to pass has to be resolved by judges who Congress themselves appoint. This is a blatant overreach of power, and this ruling makes it all the more critical to mitigate the damage before it becomes irreversible.