Chevron Pattern Disrupted: The Impact on Cybersecurity Regulations

• The Supreme Court’s recent reversal of the Chevron doctrine removes agency deference, granting courts greater authority over interpreting ambiguous laws, which could significantly impact cybersecurity regulations.
• Current and future cybersecurity regulations, which often rely on broad agency interpretations, now face heightened judicial scrutiny and potential legal challenges.
• The ruling could complicate regulatory compliance for businesses, emphasizing the need for Congress to pass clearer cybersecurity legislation and for the private sector to enhance voluntary cybersecurity measures.

On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo overturned the long-standing Chevron doctrine, which allowed courts to defer to federal agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous laws. This shift grants courts the primary responsibility for interpreting unclear statutory language, ending a precedent that afforded agencies broad discretion in defining and enforcing regulatory frameworks. This change directly impacts sectors with complex regulatory needs, like cybersecurity, where federal agencies often interpret older laws to address evolving digital threats.

The ruling introduces several challenges to cybersecurity regulations. Without Chevron deference, many existing security regulations, which interpret older laws for modern cyber threats, may now face legal challenges. For example, the SEC’s cybersecurity disclosure requirements, recent GLBA incident reporting rules, and TSA’s cybersecurity regulations for transportation could all be vulnerable to court modification if deemed to exceed Congressional intent. In addition, future cybersecurity rulemakings must now align more explicitly with statutory language, requiring agencies to provide clear evidence of Congress’s intent for these regulations to withstand judicial review.

This increased judicial oversight may lead to inconsistent interpretations of cybersecurity rules across jurisdictions, complicating compliance for organizations operating in multiple regions. The patchwork of regulations resulting from district-specific rulings could hinder efforts to harmonize cybersecurity requirements and increase litigation, potentially reducing regulatory enforcement in the cybersecurity landscape. Consequently, the ruling may incentivize industry-led initiatives for cybersecurity, as companies could face fewer mandates but greater pressure to demonstrate proactive cyber resilience.

To address these complexities, Congress must provide clearer, targeted cybersecurity legislation that outlines specific security objectives and scopes for agencies. Additionally, judicial expertise in cybersecurity issues will be crucial, as courts now play a larger role in interpreting cybersecurity regulations. In the meantime, private sector leadership in voluntarily adopting strong cybersecurity practices will be essential to maintaining resilience against cyber threats amid a shifting regulatory environment.

Read the full article