give a peer response with a question to this text Chevron deference was a legal rule established in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (467 U.S. 837, 1984) that required courts to respect a federal agency's reasonable interpretation of an unclear law it was responsible for enforcing. The rule relied on the idea that agencies have technical knowledge and that Congress often intentionally leaves policy details for them to resolve. For forty years, Chevron influenced how courts evaluated administrative actions, giving agencies significant power in areas like environmental policy, labor law, and telecommunications. Critics, however, claimed it granted too much authority to unelected officials, weakened the judiciary's duty to interpret the law, and allowed changing political administrations to easily reinterpret statutes. In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (603 U.S. 369, 2024), the Supreme Court overturned Chevron, stating that judges, not agencies, must determine the meaning of unclear laws under the Administrative Procedure Act. This decision marked a significant change in administrative law, limiting agency power and reaffirming the judiciary's essential role in interpreting statutes