On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the Labor Department, ruling that federal agencies don’t have to go through formal rule-making to make significant changes to rules interpreting regulations. Here, attorneys tell Law360 why the decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association is significant.
Pamela Moore, McCarter & English LLP
“Though technically a loss for employers, this ruling may actually be a thinly disguised win. Interpretive rules lack the effect of law and must be weighed accordingly, but Perez generally supports the notion that agencies cannot act arbitrarily in violation of the APA. The justices could have further limited the application of precedent on the standard for agency deference, but the majority’s language means that reviewing courts, not agencies, will have the final word on what regulations governing employers mean. The concurring opinions signal the conservative justices’ desire to remove any doubt that the judiciary will determine whether an agency interpretation is correct.”