October Term 2018 · Docket 18-15

Should courts defer to agency interpretations of their own ambiguous rules?

The dispute centers on whether judges must accept agency explanations of unclear regulations or retain full authority to interpret the law.

Official caption
Kisor v. Wilkie
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    the side that brought the case argued that the government agreed deference does not apply in this specific case.

    the opposing side argued that the doctrine has practical benefits and can be refined with reasonable limits.

    Justice Sotomayor questioned whether the best reading of the statute was already clear in this instance.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the scope of judicial deference to agency interpretations of their own rules. the side that brought the case seeks to eliminate this deference entirely. the opposing side argues for retaining the doctrine with stricter limits.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 27, 2019.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the side that brought the case wants the Court to overturn the Auer doctrine completely.

the opposing side wants the Court to keep the doctrine but enforce stricter limits.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the side that brought the case argues that deference to agency interpretations violates the separation of powers.

the opposing side argues that deference ensures consistent and efficient administration of complex regulations.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Ginsburg asked if the interpretation truly has the force of law.

Justice Breyer asked if studies show the problem is rare and manageable by judges.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This issue determines how much power agencies hold over their own rules. It affects the balance between administrative expertise and judicial oversight. The outcome shapes the legal landscape for all federal regulatory interpretations.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON