Chevron deference purports to require Article III judges to violate their oath of impartiality by yielding to an administrative agency’s interpretation of the law. That means that the judge is forced to rule for the government, even if that judge thinks their interpretation of the law is wrong.

And that’s exactly what happened in the Relentless and Loper Bright cases. But NCLA and its allies have challenged this unconstitutional thumb on the scales of justice in favor of the government, and the Supreme Court is set to resolve the issue this term.

Our latest Lunch and Law took place just a week after oral argument before the Supreme Court. Hear from our appellate litigators about what happened and if SCOTUS will finally kill Chevron deference completely, or only limit its effect.