Sen. Steve Rawlings R-Burlington (LRC Public Information)
FRANKFORT — While it’s a short piece of legislation, Senate Bill 84 could have widespread impacts on how Kentucky courts review authority disputes between executive branch agencies and the legislature.
If the bill passes through the General Assembly, Kentucky courts would be required to interpret laws without deferring to a state agency’s interpretation of them. Courts would also have to resolve any legal ambiguities without increasing an agency’s authority beyond statues created by the legislature.
Sen. Steve Rawlings, R-Burlington, said his hope with the bill is to mirror the effect of last year’s U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down the precedent for the Chevron deference at the federal level. That precedent limited judicial power to strike executive branch regulations, and the court’s decision to overturn it was criticized for the possibility of undermining decisions by scientists and agency experts. The Chevron deference also allowed federal agencies to have broad discretion to use their judgement to resolve any ambiguity Congress left in a federal statute.
U.S. Supreme Court flips precedent that empowered federal agencies
Rawlings, who is an attorney, told the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday morning that the federal Chevron deference allowed agencies to “grow so strong that they’ve become known as the fourth branch of government” and the precedent affected decisions at the state level.
“By passage of Senate Bill 84, the Kentucky state legislature will reclaim its role in setting state policy and will remain the sole authority to create laws,” he told his fellow senators.
Rawlings’ bill says that any court that reviews an appeal “from any case involving a statute, executive order, administrative regulation, or order of any cabinet, program cabinet, or department” within Kentucky’s executive branch must make decisions “de novo,” or with a new look, and cannot “defer to a state agency’s interpretation of any statute, administrative regulation, or order.” The bill also says courts “shall resolve any remaining ambiguity against increased agency authority.”
Though the bill received unanimous approval between the Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday morning, the parties disagree about how much deference agencies should receive during judicial review.
Before voting yes, Democratic Caucus Chair Sen. Reggie Thomas, of Lexington, said he would file a floor amendment on the bill to ensure that agencies’ positions are entitled to some consideration.
“I would not go as far here to say that the agency’s decision is not entitled to any deference,” Thomas said. “It may not be entitled to ultimate deference, but it should be given some weight here. That’s where I part ways with this bill.”
Rawlings said after the committee meeting that he doesn’t agree with Thomas’ position, adding that under his bil and the recent Supreme Court decision, “the principle would be that you would not defer to the agency at all.”
In his line of questioning of Rawlings, Republican President Robert Stivers, of Manchester, asked “what your bill would do is restore the power and make clear it is the legislative body that writes the parameters, and it is the courts who interpret that, not the agency?” Rawlings answered yes.
Rawlings also said after the meeting that he felt his bill could strengthen arguments in favor of legislative intent within Kentucky courts and “provides clarity” on checks and balances within state government.
“Lawmakers and legislators write the laws, and then the courts are to interpret the laws, and that’s basic separation of powers and how it’s set up constitutionally,” Rawlings said.