Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

King, Chevron, and the Age of Textualism

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    In the King v. Burwell oral arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts—usually one of the more active members of the Court—asked only one substantive question, addressed to the Solicitor General: "If you're right about Chevron [deference applying to this case], that would indicate that a subsequent administration could change [your] interpretation?" As it turns out, that question was crucial to Roberts's thinking and to the 6-3 opinion he authored, but almost all commentators either undervalued or misunderstood the question's import (myself included). The result of Roberts's actual thinking was an unfortunate outcome for Chevron —and potentially for the rule of law—despite the happy outcome for the Obama Administration.

    Original languageAmerican English
    JournalBoston University Law Review Annex
    Volume95
    StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

    Keywords

    • healthcare
    • Obamacare
    • textualism

    Disciplines

    • Constitutional Law
    • Health Law and Policy
    • Law
    • Supreme Court of the United States

    Cite this