Abstract
In 1984, Chevron deference was established by the US Supreme Court in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., granting administrative agencies broad powers to interpret ambiguous laws passed by Congress. This landmark decision has fostered decades of controversy among legal scholars. Opponents argued it deprived courts of their constitutional duty and inappropriately expanded the power of the administrative state, while proponents claimed federal agencies, staffed by experts in their field, possess specialized knowledge to most effectively accomplish the goals of Congress. In June 2024, the Supreme Court's ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo effectively ended Chevron deference, altering the judicial landscape with significant implications for US healthcare. In this commentary, we discuss the various potential benefits and challenges that the US healthcare system will face in a post-Chevron landscape while also considering the ways in which clinicians will be expected to help address these obstacles.