Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm News
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: November 24, 2014
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comSeveral prominent business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, recently filed amicus briefs urging the Supreme Court to require federal agencies to follow the procedures set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) when altering interpretative guidance. These arguments are grounded in the requirements of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution which prevent both the federal and state governments from depriving any person of “life, liberty, or property without due process of law,” thus guaranteeing that government may not act unfairly or arbitrarily.
The APA is the federal law that governs the way in which administrative agencies of the Executive Branch may propose and establish regulations. The law also establishes the judicial procedure for the federal courts to directly review such agency decisions.
The case, Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, involves the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) determination that mortgage loan officers are not exempt from the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The suit alleges that the new interpretation, which reversed the DOL’s previous, long-standing view, was procedurally invalid and violative of procedural due process because, under the APA, notice-and-comment rulemaking was legally required for the agency to revise its reading of the regulation in an interpretive rule.
The APA generally provides that “notice of proposed rulemaking shall be published in the Federal Register,” and, if such notice is required, the rulemaking agency must give interested persons an opportunity to submit written comments. Section 4, however, provides that this notice-and-comment requirement “does not apply” to “interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice.” So was the DOL “rulemaking” or merely providing a new interpretation?
The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia sided with the position of the Mortgage Bankers Association. Based on existing precedent, it held that “[w]hen an agency has given its regulation a definitive interpretation, and later significantly revises that interpretation, the agency has in effect amended its rule, something it may not accomplish [under the APA] without [the due process requirement of] notice and comment.” As other Courts of Appeal have reached the opposite conclusion, the resulting split led to the Supreme Court to take up this important constitutional question.
In its amicus briefs, the business groups urged the Supreme Court justices to prevent the DOL from reversing its interpretations without notice and comment, arguing that condoning the practice would allow federal agencies to arbitrarily make legislative policy under the guise of interpretive rules:
“[A]n agency could promulgate an ambiguous regulation in the first place and then, without having to respond to the concerns of the regulated community, merely interpret that rule to reach any of the results it desires,” the brief states. “But even then, no matter how much anyone had relied on the agency’s definitive interpretation, it could later change its mind, again without any feedback from the public.”
Given the issues at stake and the potential implications on the business community, we will be closely tracking the status of the case. We encourage you to check back for updates.
If you have questions about the Supreme Court case or would like to discuss how the decision may impact your company, please contact me or the Scarinci Hollenbeck Labor and Employment attorney with whom you work.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Bloomberg Law Podcast Discusses Shaquille O’Neil FTX Settlement With Ron Bienstock Little Falls, NJ – June 24, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC Partner and Chair of the firm’s Intellectual Property and Entertainment & Media departments Ronald S. Bienstock recently joined the Bloomberg Law podcast to discuss Shaquille O’Neal settling a class-action lawsuit over his FTX endorsement. […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Scarinci Hollenbeck Partner Facilitates Donation of 43 Laptops to Jersey City Organization Little Falls, NJ – July 1, 2025 – Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is proud to recognize partner Donald M. Pepe’s dedication to the community by facilitating the donation of 43 new Dell laptops to the York Street Project. Don’s commitment and dedication to sourcing these […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
FeedSpot Recognizes Donald Scarinci’s Government & Law Blog One of the Top 20 Public Law Blogs Little Falls, NJ – May 22, 2025 – Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is honored to share that Managing Partner Donald Scarinci’s Government & Law blog has been listed by FeedSpot.com as one of the “20 Best Public Law Blogs and […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
SH Partner and 100th Bomb Group Foundation Legal Counsel Discussed The Nuremberg Trials and the Law May 21, 2025 – Little Falls, NJ – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is proud to share that partner Ronald S. “Ron” Bienstock recently spoke at the 100th Bomb Group Biennial Reunion, held May 15-18, 2025, in New Orleans. The […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
Little Falls, NJ – May 1, 2025 – Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is proud to share that Managing Partner Donald Scarinci’s Constitutional Law Reporter blog has been listed by FeedSpot.com as one of the “Top 100 Legal Blogs.” No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Feedspot, a content reader that curates websites of […]
Author: Donald Scarinci
Little Falls, NJ – May 1, 2025 – Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is proud to share that Managing Partner Donald Scarinci’s Government & Law blog has been listed by FeedSpot.com as one of the “80 Best New Jersey Blogs and Websites in 2025.” *No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New […]
Author: Donald Scarinci
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!