No. 21-826
K. John Corrigan, et al. v. Deb Haaland, Secretary of the Interior, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: administrative-law agency-deference bureau-of-land-management chevron-doctrine federal-land-policy-and-management-act grazing-preference judicial-review statutory-interpretation taylor-grazing-act
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw ERISA WageAndHour JusticiabilityDoctri
AdministrativeLaw ERISA WageAndHour JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-01-21
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the Ninth Circuit correctly held that statutory silence on the issue before the court can be unambiguous for purposes of the Chevron doctrine and accordingly justify the court's disregarding the statutory interpretation embodied in the agency's regulations.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Ninth Circuit correctly held that statutory silence on the issue before the court can be unambiguous for purposes of the Chevron doctrine
Docket Entries
2022-01-24
Petition DENIED.
2022-01-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/21/2022.
2022-01-03
Waiver of right of respondents Haaland, Deb, et al. to respond filed.
2021-12-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 3, 2022)
Attorneys
Haaland, Deb, et al.
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
K. John Corrigan, et al.
William Alan Schroeder — Schroeder Law, Petitioner