THE LOPER BRIGHT CASE AND THE PROBLEM OF CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION OF THE MODERN ADMINISTRATIVE STATE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Since 1937, the Supreme Court tacitly tolerated the agencies' expansion, based on pragmatic decisions, which happened in 1984 with the Chevron case. The Court established a practical rule outlining the level of deference courts should exercise when assessing agency decisions based on vague concepts used by the statute. This case inspired a doctrine adopted by district and circuit courts to narrow the judicial review scope of technical decisions adopted by agencies, drawing scrutiny regarding the constitutionality of the modern administrative state that rose after the New Deal. Starting in 2021, the Supreme Court began to adopt a more limited interpretation of the administrative state's authority, thereby anticipating a shift in the traditionally broad Chevron doctrine and eventually a significant reverse in the precedents that tacitly tolerated the rise of the administrative state. In 2024, the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright led to the overturning of Chevron to end the doctrine used by courts when reviewing agencies' actions. However, Chevron's broad deference rule was replaced by a new and broad deference rule based on reviewing the agency's discretion, once again, based on a pragmatic approach. The Loper Bright case underscores the frailty of the constitutional underpinnings of U.S. administrative law. It reveals the absence of a consistent constitutional interpretation method to delineate the boundaries of the modern administrative state, which, for now, has survived the scrutiny of the Supreme Court.