Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump · ¶71

Start with the critics. In the past, they have criticized the major questions doctrine for two main reasons. The doctrine, they have suggested, is a novelty without basis in law. West Virginia v. EPA, 597 U. S. 697, 779 (2022) (Kagan, J., joined by, inter alios, Sotomayor, J., dissenting) (calling the doctrine a “special cano[n]” that has “magically appear[ed]”). And, they have argued, the doctrine is rooted in an “anti-administrative-state stance” that prevents Congress from employing executive agency officials to “d[o] important work.” Id., at 780. Today, the critics proceed differently. They join a section of the principal opinion that applies the major questions doctrine. Ante, at 248–255. And rather than critique the doctrine, they say only that it is “unnecessary” in this case “because ordinary principles of statutory interpretation lead to the same result.” Post, at 304–305…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.