--- title: Neil Gorsuch: Supreme Court Nominee on the Chevron Doctrine description: Neil Gorsuch is openly skeptical of a judicial doctrine that empowers federal regulators to take action on the environment and public health. canonical: https://time.com/4701114/neil-gorsuch-confirmation-hearing-chevron-doctrine/ author: Tessa Berenson article:opinion: false article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2017-03-19T19:30:08.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-02-23T03:50:12.356Z article:section: Politics og:title: How Neil Gorsuch Could Dramatically Reshape Government og:description: He opposes a long-held judicial doctrine that empowers regulators. og:url: https://time.com/4701114/neil-gorsuch-confirmation-hearing-chevron-doctrine/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt30ad8b06d013f8aa/6988be4d196cf47c1b03f396/neil-gorsuch.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 2000 og:image:height: 1125 og:image:alt: Neil Gorsuch og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: How Neil Gorsuch Could Dramatically Reshape Government twitter:description: He opposes a long-held judicial doctrine that empowers regulators. twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt30ad8b06d013f8aa/6988be4d196cf47c1b03f396/neil-gorsuch.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # How Neil Gorsuch Could Dramatically Reshape Government > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: August 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=6d71deb2-a211-4520-b09b-ff76a03d3caf&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | Subscribers | Open rate | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | 540,000 | 45.6% | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | 430,000 | 50.7% | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Daily | 240,000 | 54.1% | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Tuesday and Saturday (2x per week) | 40,000 | 31.7% | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Monday to Saturday (3x per week) | 85,000 | 37.0% | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | 40,000 | 34.2% | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | 25,000 | 28.6% | Source: TIME, August 2026. Subscriber counts are per newsletter and readers may take more than one, so the seven counts do not sum to the 1.1 million+ unique newsletter audience. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Highest open rate | 54.1%, Health Matters | TIME, August 2026 | | Largest list | 540,000, The Brief | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=6d71deb2-a211-4520-b09b-ff76a03d3caf&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=6d71deb2-a211-4520-b09b-ff76a03d3caf&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (daily health), Worth Your Time (culture, twice weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, three times a week), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement.  by [Tessa Berenson](https://time.com/author/tessa-berenson/)  ## Tessa Berenson Mar 19, 2017 7:30 PM UTC  Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court Justice nominee, meets with Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., in the Capitol, February 14, 2017. Neil Gorsuch, Supreme Court Justice nominee, meets with Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., in the Capitol, February 14, 2017. Tom Williams—AP  by [Tessa Berenson](https://time.com/author/tessa-berenson/)  ## Tessa Berenson Mar 19, 2017 7:30 PM UTC Supreme Court nominee [Neil Gorsuch](http://time.com/4653790/donald-trump-neil-gorsuch-supreme-court/) is openly skeptical of a long-standing judicial doctrine that empowers federal regulators to take action on everything from the environment to public health and safety. Adopted by the high court in a 1984 case involving the Chevron oil company, the so-called Chevron doctrine says that when the law is ambiguous, judges should defer to federal agencies’ interpretations of their own powers. Part of the idea is to give regulators the flexibility they need to adapt to changing circumstances, with Congress and the President reining them in when they overstep. But Gorsuch views it differently. In [a concurring opinion](https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/14/14-9585.pdf) last summer, he wrote that the doctrine empowers bureaucrats to “swallow huge amounts of core judicial and legislative power” and “concentrate federal power” in a way that the framers of the Constitution would have disagreed with. If Gorsuch’s views were to prevail at the Supreme Court, federal agencies would be put on a shorter leash, requiring more explicit permission before tackling such issues as climate change and employment regulations. And Gorsuch could arrive at a court increasingly sympathetic to his view, says Leonard Leo, a conservative legal scholar who advised Trump on his Supreme Court nomination. “Judge Gorsuch’s opinions in the Chevron area do reflect the trajectory of the \[Supreme\] Court’s jurisprudence,” Leo says, “which is to say, a growing concern about overreach by the administrative state and a lack of separation of powers.” Liberal advocacy group People for the American Way lists Gorsuch’s views on Chevron as one of the top three reasons people should oppose his nomination. “Gorsuch has gone even farther than \[late Justice Antonin\] Scalia in embracing an extreme and far-reaching legal theory that, if put into practice, would severely restrict the federal government’s ability to effectively address national problems,” reads a [blog post](http://www.pfaw.org/blog-posts/gorsuchs-approach-to-the-law-would-make-him-a-dangerous-justice) on the site. “As the federal government’s ability to address workplace safety, workers’ rights, environmental problems, investment abuse, consumer safety, and any number of other issues sharply diminishes, the power of Big Business and Wall Street to impose their will on every American would be greatly enhanced.” Gorsuch is sure to be grilled about this by Democrats when he faces the Senate Judiciary Committee for his confirmation hearing this week. Two Senate aides confirmed they expect questions about Chevron. And Gorsuch knows it will come up, too. In [his questionnaire](https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Neil%20M.%20Gorsuch%20SJQ%20%28Public%29.pdf) submitted to the committee, he was asked about the most significant cases he’s ever presided over. He listed _Gutierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch,_ the case where he wrote his concurring opinion about Chevron, at the very top. (In a fun quirk of history, Gorsuch’s mother was the head of the Environmental Protection Agency in the early 1980s and the defendant in the lower court decision that resulted in the Chevron ruling at the Supreme Court.) Some conservatives reject the Chevron argument put forth by People for the American way and other liberal groups. “They’re bootstrapping off of this debate about Chevron and trying to draw parallels between his skepticism about Chevron and the so-called progressive agenda to protect ‘the little guy,'” says Leo. “They’re engaging in self-contradiction. They want to be able to make the argument that \[Gorsuch\] is anti-worker, anti-consumer, anti-environment because he expresses skepticism about the Chevron doctrine, but at the same time, they want to say that he’s a rubber stamp for the Trump Administration and the executive branch. You can’t have it both ways.” But the split on Chevron views has never fallen along simple liberal-conservative lines. “It depends on whose ox is being gored,” says Thomas O. McGarity, an administrative law expert and professor at the University of Texas at Austin law school. Chevron was created under a conservative government and was originally used to facilitate deregulation; under liberal governments, it was wielded for greater oversight and regulation. Conservative late Justice Antonin Scalia, for example, who Gorsuch stands to replace, once supported Chevron, arguing it allows the government to function properly. In a speech at Duke Law School in 1989, [Scalia said](http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj) that one of Chevron’s “major advantages” is “to permit needed flexibility, and appropriate political participation, in the administrative process.” McGarity argues that another switch could be coming, because environmental groups, many of whom would have supported greater power for the EPA in the past, might reconsider their position in this political climate. “If they’re really thinking through this particular issue, they may not want a judge who’s going to defer to a \[Scott\] Pruitt-held EPA as he starts undoing things that the Obama Administration did,” McGarity explains. In the current political landscape, Gorsuch’s view on Chevron fits broadly with a goal of the Trump Administration: to roll back regulatory powers across the government, something Trump adviser Steve Bannon calls the [“deconstruction of the administrative state.” ](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/top-wh-strategist-vows-a-daily-fight-for-deconstruction-of-the-administrative-state/2017/02/23/03f6b8da-f9ea-11e6-bf01-d47f8cf9b643%5Fstory.html) “Article I is the Congress, Article II is the President. Article III are the courts. And then there’s this administrative state, combining all three,” White House counsel Don McGahn told TIME in an [exclusive interview](http://time.com/4700311/donald-trump-white-house-counsel-steve-bannon/). “They make the law, they enforce the law, and then they decide who violates the law, destroying the constitutional separation of powers that was designed to protect individual liberty.” In Gorsuch’s famous Chevron opinion, he referred to the doctrine as “an elephant in the room” and wrote that “the time has come to face the behemoth.” He should get another chance wrestle with it this week. ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/4701114/neil-gorsuch-confirmation-hearing-chevron-doctrine/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/4701114/neil-gorsuch-confirmation-hearing-chevron-doctrine/"},"headline":"How Neil Gorsuch Could Dramatically Reshape Government","datePublished":"2017-03-19T19:30:08.000Z","dateModified":"2026-02-23T03:50:12.356Z","description":"Neil Gorsuch is openly skeptical of a judicial doctrine that empowers federal regulators to take action on the environment and public health.","url":"https://time.com/4701114/neil-gorsuch-confirmation-hearing-chevron-doctrine/","keywords":["Supreme Court","Congress","onetime","Neil Gorsuch"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt30ad8b06d013f8aa/6988be4d196cf47c1b03f396/neil-gorsuch.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Tessa Berenson","jobTitle":null,"url":"https://time.com/author/tessa-berenson/"}],"articleSection":"Politics","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt30ad8b06d013f8aa/6988be4d196cf47c1b03f396/neil-gorsuch.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Neil Gorsuch","caption":"Neil Gorsuch","creditText":"Tom Williams—AP","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/politics/","name":"Politics"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/supreme-court/","name":"Supreme Court"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/4701114/neil-gorsuch-confirmation-hearing-chevron-doctrine/","name":"How Neil Gorsuch Could Dramatically Reshape Government"}}]}] ```