The U.S. Supreme Court overturned Chevron in a 6-3 decision, and it appears the reversal of the 40-year-old doctrine may be a clear win for the agriculture industry. Support for the decision has been voiced by the American Farm Bureau Federation, National Cattlemen’s Association, National Pork Producers, and even House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson.

Since its establishment in 1984, Chevron allowed Congress to pass largely ambiguous laws and leave it to federal agencies to determine how best to implement them.

Consider the Clean Water Act and the ever-changing definitions of Waters of the United States (WOTUS). America’s producers have been on a regulatory rollercoaster due to the EPA’s broad interpretative leeway and shifting political priorities of new administrations.

What’s the Verdict?
Is Chevron a decisive win for agriculture? There is certainly a strong case to be made. After all, reducing the power of unelected bureaucrats and increasing accountability for those who write our nation’s laws has a nice ring to it. Those who professionally advocate for industries that are susceptible to double-edged policies – like agriculture – know to be cautious.

There may be less bureaucracy from federal agencies to contend with, but we can undoubtedly look forward to more in-court litigation and increased pressure on legislators to be specific in rulemaking. This demands we step up our game if we want to see our priorities make it to the finish line.

For example, take the 2023 Farm Bill – excuse us, the 2024 Farm Bill – or will it be the 2025 Farm Bill? Time will tell. The point is, any regulations related to crop insurance, farm subsidies, and environmental standards will be under the microscope of increased judicial scrutiny. If you have Farm Bill priorities, you need Farm Bill specifics because every word matters.

The Bottom Line
Two words we will hear far more often: Congressional Intent. With Chevron gone, lower courts no longer need to defer to federal agencies to interpret what Congress meant.

We need to communicate clearly what our issues are and what language is required to mitigate any confusion or misinterpretation. But our work doesn’t stop in congressional offices alone. Demand for an engaged and informed community of advocates eager to get involved on our behalf will remain one of the strongest assets we have.

That means more conversations on the issues our members and everyday Americans care about. Quality engagement isn’t rocket science, but it does take time and effort.

Common sense agricultural policy, unfortunately, is not so common.

Let’s get better at telling our story both in the halls of Congress and at the dinner table because advancing our cause means bringing real people along for the ride.