HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SUPPORT WLF

Case Detail


Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Assín
On March 9, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a federal administrative agency, before significantly altering its interpretation of an agency regulation, is not required to provide public notice of its plans and a meaningful opportunity for members of the public to participate in the revision process. The decision was a setback for WLF, which filed a brief urging the Court to find that agencies must use formal, notice-and-comment rulemaking when adopting significant interpretive changes. The case focused on a 2010 Obama Administration policy reversal. In 2006, the Department of Labor (DOL) determined that mortgage loan officers were exempt from overtime rules. The Obama Administrationís DOL repudiated that determination; WLF faulted DOL for reversing course without providing advance notice of its plans and an opportunity for the public to suggest alternatives. The Court held federal law never requires ďinterpretive rulesĒ to go through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
Case Status:
Loss.
More Information and Downloads:
10/16/2014: Download the Brief
Press Release: High Court Will Hear Argument Monday on Whether Agencies Must Seek Input Before Reversing Policies
Press Release: WLF Asks High Court to Preserve Requirement that Agencies Provide Notice and Seek Public Input When Reversing Formal Policies
  • Welcome to the Washington Legal Foundation
  • 2009 Massachusetts Ave., NW
    Washington, DC 20036
  • info@wlf.org  |  ph. 202-588-0302
    ©2017 WLF All Rights Reserved