I was listening to the oral argument Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System today, and I was struck by the following exchange (from the transcript):
JUSTICE JACKSON: If I understand correctly, every new company created in an industry can suddenly lead to a challenge that could risk or undermine the validity of the entire basis of the industry, every new company, because you say that every new company created can lead to a similar cause. Now, whether we succeed or not, I understand, but doesn’t this risk destabilizing the sector?
MR. WEIR: We don’t think so. We—we think the experience in the Sixth Circuit is what you’ll see. There – there was no increase in challenges to the old regulations in the Sixth Circuit, and we would see them there in the last –
JUDGE JACKSON: It’s…it’s possible because we had other doctrines that prevented, so, you know, for example, Chevron existed and so there were already a lot of things – you know, right? For example, there are reasons why you may not have an improvement. I just wonder, in a world where you could carry out these actions, why wouldn’t you have this problem?
MR. WEIR: Well, I think that because most of the regulations are valid, there’s no argument that they’re illegal. Then you would see… then you wouldn’t see them. You will only see challenges or potential flaws for those that have flaws.
Was this a suggestion? Chevron will it no longer exist after this deadline? I guess we’ll know by July.