An Agency Must Earn Deference
An agency is not entitled to deference simply because it is an agency. It is true that agencies are more specialized than courts are. But for courts to defer to them, agencies must do more than announce the fact of their comparative advantage; they must actually use it. And that means, among many other things, that the agency must apply – rather than disregard – the relevant statutory and regulatory criteria.
Thus begins the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Meister v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture. The Court went on to hold that the Forest Service had effectively disregarded its own rules and procedures and its actions were reversed. The interesting discussion in the opinion, however, was the Court’s finding that an agency is not entitled to automatic deference.
Attorneys who try cases against the myriad state and federal agencies constantly run into the problem that the court spots the agency ten points (in a twenty point game) before the trial even begins. While the U.S. Supreme Court has held that deference is permissible in some instances, it is also the case that an agency is not automatically conferred such deference. The agency must reasonably interpret its rules and is required to apply all relevant statutory and regulatory criteria.
Meister is a timely reminder that the statement “Good morning Your Honor – I’m from the EPA (or DNR or IRS or any number of other acronyms), so I win,” is not the law. Sometimes courts, and administrative law judges, need to be reminded of this fact and Meister says it oh so eloquently (and quotably) when it says: “Deference must be earned.”
