The NSA can’t regulate itself - it needs court oversight. Courts are allowed to decide what matters to national security and what doesn’t, despite not being agents.
The Police can’t regulate themselves - they need court oversight. Courts are allowed to define what is acceptable policing and what is not, despite not being police.
The EPA can regulate itself and understands science. Courts aren’t allowed to weigh in because they aren’t scientists. The EPA is a morally upright actor, all other government agencies aren’t.
A perfectly rational position. (I say that with extreme sarcasm - it’s malarkey.)
The EPA was already significantly more subject to judicial review than the NSA, even prior to Chevron deference falling.
The cops are theoretically subject to it, but in practice... nah, mostly not. They receive at least Chevron-levels of deference for things like "I feared for my life!" or "he was coming right at me!" or "I thought it was a gun!" or "based on my experience and training the suspect was acting suspiciously" sort of expert claims.
When it doesn’t, say they courts and the regulators are captured and crooked.