There have been a number of court cases recently, that if things play out correctly, will derail the Administrative State.

I'm not a lawyer, so I only understand the basics.

• Traditionally, Congress was expected to pass new laws.
• This more or less was the model for rule until the mid-70s when the various regulatory agencies started "filling in the blanks" of what Congress didn't explicitly mention
• Congress then got more and more disinterested in the specifics, only passing laws that outlined in very broad brushstrokes what it wanted to achieve. Letting the agencies fill in the specifics as they came up.
• This came to a head in 1980s in a court case involving Chevron, in which it was battling against some environmental regulations that it said was not a law. This became known as the Chevron Doctrine (ie. that these agencies were allowed to fill in specifics if not clearly defined by Congress)

Now there are 2 cases (I think) in front of SCOTUS which could upend the Chevron doctrine.

One is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loper_Bright_Enterprises_v._Raimondo

I forget the name of the other, but hopefully these come out in favor in scrapping or severely restricting the ability of these agencies to "create laws"