Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

It is well established that an agency's interpretation need not be the only possible reading of a regulation--or even the best one--to prevail. When an agency interprets its own regulation, the Court, as a general rule, defers to it “unless that interpretation is 'plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.' Chase Bank USA, N. A. v. McCoy, 562 U.S. ___, ___, 131 S. Ct. 871, 178 L. Ed. 2d 716, 719, 727 (2011)) (quoting Auer, 519 U.S., at 461, 117 S. Ct. 905, 137 L. Ed. 2d 79).

For decades, the Court has been giving agencies the authority to say what their rules mean, under the harmless-sounding banner of “defer[ring] to an agency's interpretation of its own regulations.” Talk America, Inc. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., 564 U.S. ___, ___, 131 S. Ct. 2254, 180 L. Ed. 2d 96, 112 (2011) (Scalia, J., concurring). This is generally called Seminole Rock or Auer deference. See Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 325 U.S. 410, 65 S. Ct. 1215, 89 L. Ed. 1700 (1945); Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452, 117 S. Ct. 905, 137 L. Ed. 2d 79 (1997). 

An agency's interpretation of ...

Register or login to access full content