[jakogut]

> Their behavior is fundamentally undemocratic.

Correct, because in the United States, our model of government is a Democratic Republic, not a democracy. For all of the flaws of our system of law, the Constitution is considered supreme, and any laws that violate the Constitution are to be considered null and void. The job of the Supreme Court is to decide the Constitutionality of laws.

One interpretation of removing Chevron deference is that it's defacto rewriting law, another is that executive agencies have been doing this for decades already. The truth is probably some mix of the two.

[noobermin]

>Constitution is considered supreme, and any laws that violate the Constitution are to be considered null and void. The job of the Supreme Court is to decide the Constitutionality of laws.

A plain and non-ideological reading of what you typed is that this is a contradiction at best and saying the SCOTUS supersedes the constitution at worst.

[yieldcrv]

At worst yes, the difficulty of overriding them via constitutional amendment or a restructured law is a vulnerability of our system

But the paradox is that is part of the constitution too. There are several creatures of the constitution that supersede the constitution. Treaties can.

[Wolfenstein98k]

Only if you presuppose that the agency is always right.

Agencies are often wrong and sometimes very seriously so. The FDA trying to take over regulation of tests is another example.

There is a perfectly legitimate view that Chevron deference is - at least in some circumstances - not indefeasible.