))
Down Goes Chevron: A 40-Year Precedent Overturned by the Supreme Court
Manage episode 429528962 series 3560734
Indhold leveret af Epstein Becker & Green, P.C., Epstein Becker, and P.C.. Alt podcastindhold inklusive episoder, grafik og podcastbeskrivelser uploades og leveres direkte af Epstein Becker & Green, P.C., Epstein Becker, and P.C. eller deres podcastplatformspartner. Hvis du mener, at nogen bruger dit ophavsretligt beskyttede værk uden din tilladelse, kan du følge processen beskrevet her https://da.player.fm/legal.
In a recent landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Chevron doctrine in the case of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. This ruling has significant implications for employers and other entities in the health care and life sciences industries, as it changes the way courts are likely to interpret and apply regulations issued by federal agencies.
On this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys George Breen, Stuart Gerson, Rob Wanerman, and Paul DeCamp analyze the fallout of this monumental decision, discuss what it means for entities seeking to challenge ambiguous statutes and regulations, and assess how to proceed from here.
Visit our site for more information and related resources: https://www.ebglaw.com/dhc78
Subscribe for email notifications: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe.
Visit: http://diagnosinghealthcare.com.
This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.
77 episoder
Del
