The Post-Chevron Deference Landscape in Healthcare Litigation: An Interview with Jason Bring and Brian Stimson of Allen & Ginsburg

Jason Bring, co-chair of the AGG Healthcare Litigation team at Allen & Ginsburg, continues his discussion on agency deference with partner Brian Stimson in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises, Inc. v. Raimondo. The ruling overturned Chevron deference, which had been a guiding principle in many cases involving regulatory agencies.

The conversation between Jason and Brian focuses on how this decision will impact healthcare litigation moving forward. They explore the potential implications for future cases involving regulatory agencies and how this change in deference could influence the outcomes of disputes in the healthcare industry.

Furthermore, they analyze how this shift in deference might prompt agencies to reconsider their approach to regulatory enforcement and decision-making processes. This discussion underscores the evolving dynamics of agency deference in the legal landscape and highlights its potential ramifications for healthcare litigation and regulatory oversight.

In addition to these implications, Jason and Brian also reflect on the broader trend of power distribution among branches of government and its implications for legal interpretation and enforcement. The Supreme Court’s decision seems to signal a return of authority from the Executive Branch to the courts and legislature, which could have far-reaching consequences for legal systems across industries.

Overall, this episode highlights how agency deference is an important consideration in healthcare litigation and underscores the need for understanding its evolving dynamics in order to navigate complex legal systems effectively.