The justices announced they would take up an appeal from herring fishermen in the Atlantic who say the National Marine Fisheries Service does not have the authority to require them to pay the salaries of government monitors who ride aboard the fishing vessels.

Their action means they will reconsider a 1984 case – Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council – that sets forward factors to determine when courts should defer to a government agency’s interpretation of the law.

Conservatives on the bench have cast a skeptical eye on the so-called Chevron deference, arguing that agencies are often too insulated from the usual checks and balances essential to the separation of powers.

[This is a big deal. Courts have given a lot of “deference” on regulation via Chevron, which amounts usually to just punting. Ending Chevron would force agencies to be more accountable to the judiciary, and it might even force Congress to be more explicit in its grants of authority — and the limits of those grants. — Ed]