Griffin v. Garrett

• Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
• Decided: August 6, 2024
• Docket: 2:23-cv-00198
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION DE MARIO B. GRIFFIN PETITIONER Reg #19675-045 v. Case No: 2:23-cv-00198-LPR CHAD GARRETT, Warden, FCC Forrest City RESPONDENT ORDER The Court has received and reviewed the Recommended Disposition (RD) submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Edie R. Ervin (Doc. 6) and the Petitioner’s Objections (Doc. 7). The Court notes that the RD relies in large part on the Chevron doctrine. This is understandable, as the RD was written prior to the Supreme Court’s recent overturning of that doctrine.! But given the demise of the Chevron doctrine, as well as the RD’s frank admission of the novelty of Petitioner’s argument, the Court concludes that the Petition should be served and a Response ordered from Respondent. The Court refers this case back to Judge Ervin for proceedings consistent with this Order.’ IT IS SO ORDERED this 6th day of August 2024.

Y

LEE P. RUDOFSKY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

' Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo, 144 S. Ct. 2244, 2273 (2024). ? The Court wishes to be clear. If, after a Response from Respondent, Judge Ervin concludes that a straight statutory analysis (i.¢., without the use of the Chevron doctrine) requires dismissal of the Petition, she may and should enter such a Recommendation. The Court’s only point in this Order is that the question is close enough, especially in light of the demise of Chevron, to merit a fully-briefed adjudication.