Kisor v. Wilkie

Vietnam War veteran James Kisor applied for PTSD disability benefits from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. The VA denied his claim, relying on its interpretation of the term "relevant" in its own regulations to exclude certain records. Kisor appealed through the VA and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which deferred to the agency’s interpretation under the Auer deference doctrine. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and issued its decision on June 26, 2019. The Court declined to overrule Auer deference but imposed significant new limitations. Before deferring, courts must exhaust all traditional tools of interpretation and determine the regulation is genuinely ambiguous; only then can they defer to an agency interpretation that is reasonable. The case was vacated and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this clarified standard.

The Supreme Court declined to overrule Auer deference but substantially limited its application. The judgment of the Federal Circuit was vacated, and the case was remanded to apply the new framework, requiring courts to independently determine whether a regulation is genuinely ambiguous using all traditional interpretive tools before considering deference to the agency’s interpretation.

Whether the Supreme Court should overrule the Auer deference doctrine, under which courts defer to an administrative agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation.

The decision preserved but constrained administrative agency power, reinforcing judicial independence in statutory and regulatory interpretation. It provides a clearer roadmap for lower courts reviewing agency rules, affecting a wide range of regulatory areas including environment, healthcare, and labor. For veterans, it highlighted the challenges in navigating VA claims and the broader balance of power between the judiciary and executive branch agencies.