• Overturning the Chevron doctrine could serve as a tool to limit the size and scope of the federal government.
• SCOTUS decision on ATF bump stock ban served as a foreshadowing of the Loper decision.
• Cities can now address homelessness through reasonable means without concerns of violating the “cruel and unusual punishment” clause of the Eighth Amendment.

​The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023-24 term covered a large swath of issues, including decisions on several landmark cases. But which ones stand out the most for their potential impact on Utah communities? Here’s a quick overview.

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo

In a 6-2 decision (Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson abstaining), the Supreme Court overturned a precedent called Chevron deference. This precedent gave government agencies deference to interpret ambiguous laws, meaning the courts would defer to the agency’s interpretation so long as it wasn’t unreasonable. Some believed that this provided the agencies with the ability to “legislate outside of Congress.”

“Agencies now have to convince the court that their regulation is the best interpretation of the statute,” says Bill Duncan, Sutherland’s constitutional law and religious freedom fellow.

“It provides an important tool to limit the size of the government.”

Garland v. Cargill

Under the Trump administration in 2017, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) classified weapons with a bump stock as a “machine gun.” Machine guns were outlawed in 1986 under the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act. The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, overturned the ATF’s interpretation, arguing that the National Firearms Act of 1934 states a machine gun must fire multiple rounds of ammunition with a single pull of the trigger. A bump stock, on the other hand, effectively “bumps” the gun against the shooter’s trigger finger by bouncing the force of the recoil against a spring inside the stock. Though it can increase the rate of fire, a bump stock still requires the trigger to be pulled each time a round is fired.

Duncan referenced the Chevron doctrine as an example of the ATF’s overreach in their interpretation.

“The legal question is, what authority does the ATF have to ban bump stocks?” he said.

“The ATF went too far and tried to add interpretation to the original language.”

Grants Pass v. Johnson

In a 6-3 decision, the court ruled that cities seeking to address homelessness are not in violation of the Eighth Amendment by utilizing applicable laws to help regulate public encampments. Cities and law enforcement can now proactively address public camping by incentivizing homeless individuals to utilize shelters.

Duncan clarified that this is intended to help the homeless, not cause them further harm.

“We’re allowing cities to try and do something to address the problem,” Duncan said. “It’s not a green light to punish people for being homeless; it’s just recognizing the general authority the city has to promote the welfare of its citizens.”

For a more in-depth perspective on this article, review our Insights article here.