Beyond the January decision that knocked back the COVID-19 ETS, the Court just gave a specific example in last week’s West Virginia decision concerning a hypothetical OSHA action. Which Workplace Law Agencies Should be Concerned?įirst and foremost, OSHA appears to be squarely in the current Court’s sights. The Court will also be scrutinizing agency action that it determines falls far outside the bounds of traditional action and enforcement, as pointed out in Justice Gorsuch’s concurring opinion. When viewed in tandem, these two cases signal that the Court will no doubt be heavily scrutinizing agency action to determine whether they have far-reaching economic and political ramifications. If this theory rings a bell, it may be because the major questions doctrine was recently utilized by the Court to strike down OSHA’s COVID-19 vaccine-or-test mandate. The decision signals this Court’s continued reliance on the major questions doctrine to limit the executive branch’s attempted expansion of agency power and authority. In arriving at its decision, the Court explained that the doctrine exists because it presumes “Congress intends to make major policy decisions itself, not leave those decisions to agencies.” The Court said that the agency’s Obama-era regulations violated the “major questions doctrine” because they would have far-reaching economic consequences without express congressional authorization.
#Spell decisions full
( You can read the full opinion here.)īut the theory cited by the Court could eventually have significant workplace law ramifications. Environmental Protection Agency, the Court concluded that the EPA could not implement and enforce its Clean Air Act regulations requiring power producers to shift energy generation from one energy sector (coal) to another (natural gas or solar). Last week’s decision did not directly involve workplace law but its ramifications on the workplace could be significant. What do employers need to know about this potentially significant development? While SCOTUS has already notified the federal workplace safety agency that this theory could curtail its actions, many Court observers are now expecting to see an impact on wage and hour, labor, pay equity, and employment law in general in the coming years.
Under this doctrine, an agency must point to clear congressional authorization before engaging in action that courts conclude has broad-reaching economic and political significance. But the theory used by the Court to knock back the EPA – a relatively obscure concept called the “major questions doctrine” – may impact workplace law in ways many could not have anticipated as recently as half a year ago.
Environmental Protection Agency, a 6-3 decision that significantly limited the broad power the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) attempted to exercise. Given the consequential nature of many of the issues decided by the Supreme Court this year, employers can be forgiven for overlooking the Supreme Court’s June 30 opinion in West Virginia v.
0 kommentar(er)
