Abstract
This essay will explain why the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo—overruling the deference afforded regulatory interpretation in the Court’s well-established decision in Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council—should not threaten a core of longstanding disability rights regulations. My goal is to provide a useful resource for litigators facing arguments challenging those regulations in the wake of Loper Bright.
Share with your community
About the Author
Amy’ Robertson is a partner at Fox & Robertson, an impact civil rights litigation firm. Robertson’s practice focuses on systems change litigation in disability rights, in particular the rights of Deaf and hard of hearing people to effective communication, the rights of people who use wheelchairs to physical access, and the rights of prisoners with disabilities. She has written or co-written a number of amicus briefs supporting rigorous enforcement of disability rights laws.
Leave a Reply