What is Auer deference?

What is Auer deference?

• A. Deference to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulations; applied when a regulation is ambiguous after text and context analysis.
• B. Deference to the agency's interpretation of any statute.
• C. Deference to a court's reading of agency policy.
• D. No deference; courts review regulation de novo.

Answer: (C)

Auer deference is the principle that courts give deference to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulations when the regulation is genuinely ambiguous after applying ordinary text-and-context analysis. The idea is that the agency, as the closest issuer of the rule, should determine its meaning, as long as the interpretation is reasonable and not inconsistent with the regulation’s plain text, structure, or purpose. This means a court will uphold the agency’s reading of the regulation if two conditions are met: the regulation is ambiguous, and the agency’s interpretation is a permissible construction. It’s not about deferring to a court’s reading of agency policy, and it’s not about deference to a statute’s meaning. Statutory interpretation is typically governed by other doctrines (like Chevron, though that’s about statutes and has its own limitations), while Auer specifically concerns regulatory text. Modern treatments, such as after recent cases, emphasize that the agency’s interpretation must be reasonable and grounded in the regulation itself, with the Court sometimes applying tighter scrutiny to ensure the reading isn’t plainly erroneous.

Auer deference is the principle that courts give deference to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulations when the regulation is genuinely ambiguous after applying ordinary text-and-context analysis. The idea is that the agency, as the closest issuer of the rule, should determine its meaning, as long as the interpretation is reasonable and not inconsistent with the regulation’s plain text, structure, or purpose. This means a court will uphold the agency’s reading of the regulation if two conditions are met: the regulation is ambiguous, and the agency’s interpretation is a permissible construction.

It’s not about deferring to a court’s reading of agency policy, and it’s not about deference to a statute’s meaning. Statutory interpretation is typically governed by other doctrines (like Chevron, though that’s about statutes and has its own limitations), while Auer specifically concerns regulatory text. Modern treatments, such as after recent cases, emphasize that the agency’s interpretation must be reasonable and grounded in the regulation itself, with the Court sometimes applying tighter scrutiny to ensure the reading isn’t plainly erroneous.