"Three recent Supreme Court decisions increase industries’ chances of winning regulatory challenges, but only after a period of divergent lower court rulings on what the nation’s primary commercial chemical law requires.
The high court’s decision in Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo overturned the 40-year-old Chevron doctrine that had directed federal courts to defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous or silent statutory provisions. Under the US Constitution, the final interpretation of laws is the “province of the courts,” the Supreme Court said.
The Supreme Court “didn’t say ‘ignore what the agency said,’” according to Robert Sussman, an attorney in private practice who previously worked at the Environmental Protection Agency and Latham & Watkins LLP. But when a court disagrees with an agency’s interpretation, “the final word on the statute rests with the court.”
“The court is obligated to reach its own conclusion,” he said. “That’s significant.”"
Advertisement 
