Talk:Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.

The article says: "a reviewing court determines (1) whether a statute permits or forbids an agency's interpretation". So when does a statute permit interpretation by an agency and when does it forbid interpretation?

Furtheron it says "the court decides whether the agency's interpretation of a statute is reasonable or permissible". What actually is the difference between "reasonable" and "permissible"? To me it sounds the same? And when is an interpretation reasonable and when permissible? Thanks. --141.53.209.148 22:20, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The answer to your first question depends on the range of possible meanings of a particular statute. The art of finding such meaning is the arcane art of statutory interpretation, which is one of the skills taught to law students in a standard first-year Lawyering Skills class. There are entire books and treatises on statutory interpretation.

As for the difference between reasonable and permissible, if you read the actual opinion, you'll see that Justice Stevens uses both terms as if they are synonyms for each other. But if you're wondering what either of them actually means, that would take me about two hours and several thousand words to explain in writing. If you want to understand Chevron, go to law school. --Coolcaesar 05:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, so if interpretation is something you can learn, in general a lawyer from L.A. will interpret a statute in the same way a awyer from N.Y. would? Or is interpretation just a way to enable judges decide the way they like it?

Reasonable, permissible... and i thought law was something people should understand - i should have known better than that ;-) --141.53.209.148 11:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

...And a year later, here's your answer! Each state has its own laws regarding interpretation of statutes, as well as interpretation of contracts. Interpretation *is* just a way to enable judges to decide the way they like it; it's a procedure that's usually addressed by state case law, so the state Supreme Court can do whatever it wants. Lower state courts have to follow along. JSC ltd (talk) 02:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)