There’s a lot to point out is abject bullshit in Roberts’ opinion. But the most slipshod part is that it doesn’t provide a new standard for resolving ambiguous statutes
If, as Roberts seems to believe, the courts can make all statutes non-ambiguous, Chevron would simply be universally inapplicable
Roberts, overruling Chevron with incredible and unearned hubris: "Perhaps most fundamentally, Chevron’s presumption is misguided because agencies have no special competence in resolving statutory ambiguities. Courts do."
