Abstract
CONTENTS
I. Introduction . . 615
II. Background . 617
A. Historical Backdrop: Nebraska Case Law . 617
B. Historical Backdrop: Federal Law . 617
C. History of Nebraska’s APA, Scope of Review, and
Questions of Law . . 619
D. Nebraska in Context . 621
III. Why Deference Matters . 622
IV. The Defenses of Deference . . 624
A. Assuming Congress Intended for Agencies to Resolve Ambiguities in Regulations, or Even Statutes, is a Bad Assumption . . 626
B. The Kisor Defense Lacks a Connection to the Federal APA . . 628
C. Rethinking Agency Expertise . 630
D. Uniform Interpretations of Law Are Inapplicable in Nebraska . . 632
V. Tension in Nebraska Law . . 632
A. Nebraska’s APA Requires De Novo Review . 633
B. The Meaning of Regulations Is a Question of Law and Nebraska Appellate Courts Must Independently Review Questions of Law . . 635
C. Deference Renders the De Novo Review Requirement Superfluous . . 636
D. No Deference Is Given to Agency Interpretations of Statutes . . . 637
E. Judicial Deference to Agency Interpretations of Regulations Violates Nebraska’s Constitutional Guarantee of the Separation of Powers . 638
VI. Conclusion . . 639
Recommended Citation
Trevor J. Rogers,
A Dubious Proposition of Law: Why Judicial Deference to Agency Interpretations of Regulations Is at Odds with Nebraska Law,
101 Neb. L. Rev.
(2022)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol101/iss2/12