The recent decision by the US Supreme Court to overturn the Chevron doctrine has significant implications for the regulation of crypto assets by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This decision, which originated in a 1984 case titled Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, fundamentally alters the way federal courts must defer to agency interpretations of laws and statutes.
Economist Timothy Peterson has highlighted that the overturning of Chevron will hinder the SEC from acting as an “automatic subject matter expert” on crypto. According to Peterson, this decision limits the SEC’s “unilateral interpretive power” against Bitcoin, marking a significant win for the cryptocurrency. He believes that the courts will now be required to scrutinize the SEC’s anti-crypto stance, potentially leading to fairer regulations and a more balanced legal landscape.
FOX Business reporter Eleanor Terrett has noted that while the end of Chevron does not completely remove the SEC’s ability to bring enforcement actions, it does raise questions about whether Congress has granted the SEC the authority to regulate crypto as a security. This decision could have implications for the SEC’s ongoing case against Consensys and its claims regarding certain tokens as securities. Terrett suggests that the SEC’s arguments may now hold less weight in court following the overturning of Chevron.
Lawyer Paul Clement, who presented an oral argument in the case that led to the overturning of Chevron, highlighted the challenges faced by Congress in addressing crypto regulation. He emphasized that agencies, such as the SEC under Chair Gary Gensler, have been able to claim authority in areas where Congress has not explicitly granted it. Clement’s remarks underscore the need for a clearer regulatory framework for crypto assets in the absence of Chevron.
The US Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Chevron in two cases on June 28 signifies a shift in how statutory authority is interpreted by agencies. The New Civil Liberties Alliance, involved in one of the cases, emphasized that the decision means agencies can no longer rely on gaps and ambiguities in statutes to assert their authority. Instead, Article III courts will be tasked with addressing any ambiguities that arise, leading to a more principled and intelligible legal development.
The decision to overturn Chevron has far-reaching implications for the regulation of crypto assets by the SEC. It marks a significant shift in how agencies interpret and enforce laws, particularly in areas where Congress has not provided clear guidance. Moving forward, the legal landscape for crypto regulation is likely to evolve as courts grapple with the implications of this landmark decision.
Leave a Reply