The de-facto effect of this is the six-year statute of limitations for challenging agency action is now abolished, and any agency action no matter how old and settled is now effectively open to challenge...days after Chevron was overruled
First is Corner Post. Barrett has the court's 6-3 ideological decision holding that APA claims accrue from plaintiff's injury, not the date of the final rule — opening up all rules to possible new challenges. Jackson writes the dissent for the liberals. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23p...
Also....weirdly this seems to vindicate Matt Kacsmaryk's bizarre statute of limitations ruling for challenging the decades-old FDA approval for marketing mifepristone (though his reasoning was totally different from Barrett's)
scholar.google.com/scholar_case...bsky.app/profile/saba...
Because the 5th Circuit panel didn't accept Judge Kacsmaryk's ridic statute of limitations theory, the question that went up to SCOTUS didn't touch upon the FDA *approval* of mifepristone, only whether FDA had followed proper procedure when FDA decided in-person dispensation was no longer required
After FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, conservative activists would need to find a test-plaintiff who can establish Art. III standing to challenge FDA's regulatory approval, which may not be easy to do (who was injured by that?), but the statute of limitations is no longer much of a barrier
