The Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo marks a significant departure from the Chevron framework, which guided judicial review of ambiguous statutes for more than forty years. The court ruled that Chevron deference conflicts with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), asserting that courts, rather than agencies, must interpret statutory provisions. This decision has major implications for how courts will handle regulatory issues, particularly those involving complex scientific and technical matters.
In a recent article for the Ohio Association of Civil Trial Attorneys (OACTA) Quarterly Review, Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partner Nina Webb-Lawton discusses the Loper Bright ruling and its impact on judicial deference. Webb-Lawton compares the decision with Ohio’s stance on agency interpretations and provides insight into the challenges businesses may face in light of this shift in legal standards.
Webb-Lawton has nearly three decades of experience defending companies in toxic tort litigation involving asbestos, silica, benzene, talc, and workplace chemical exposures. She also has experience in antitrust litigation, general business litigation, and appellate work. Webb-Lawton, admitted to practice in both California and Ohio, currently serves as the Chair of OACTA’s Product Liability & Toxic Tort Committee.
Read the full article in the OACTA Quarterly Review Fall/Winter 2025 issue.