The end of this precedent heralds a disturbing new era where judges—rather than technical experts—will increasingly determine the merits or validity of scientific regulations, potentially undermining the very foundations of evidence-based policymaking.
The judiciary will now have a more prominent role in interpreting laws, even when those interpretations hinge on highly technical and scientific considerations. However, as judges do not typically possess the technical expertise found within federal agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, this shift is problematic. First, it undermines the role of scientific and technical expertise in policymaking. Second, it risks politicizing decisions that should be grounded in scientific evidence and specialized knowledge. And third—and perhaps most dangerously—it creates an environment of regulatory uncertainty, as judicial interpretations may vary significantly from one case to another and by state and district.
This change also underscores the critical need for professional societies to be more proactive in offering their expertise on technical issues and policies. In this new regulatory landscape, the American Nuclear Society and similar technical organizations must take on the responsibility of ensuring that scientific and technical perspectives are adequately represented in judicial deliberations. ANS, representing professionals in the nuclear field, possesses significant expertise that can be called on in cases involving the complexities of nuclear science and technology—areas often beyond the purview of judicial understanding.
One crucial way ANS can contribute is by submitting or joining in amicus briefs in cases that have significant implications for nuclear policy and regulation. Briefs of amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) allow organizations to provide additional information, perspectives, and expertise that may not be fully represented by the parties directly involved in a case. By offering detailed insights into the technical aspects of nuclear energy and safety, ANS can help ensure that judicial decisions are informed by accurate, science-based knowledge.
The overturning of the Chevron doctrine represents a fundamental change in how federal regulations will be interpreted and enforced. As judges take on a more significant role in evaluating the validity of scientific and technical regulations, proactive engagement by technical organizations like ANS becomes paramount. By submitting amicus briefs, engaging in public advocacy, collaborating with other stakeholders, and working with lawmakers, these organizations can help ensure that decisions affecting public policy continue to be informed by the best available science and technical expertise.
Paul Dickman is the president of the World Council on Isotopes and chair of ANS’s External Affairs Committee.
