The Supreme Court of the United States on Monday declined to hear an appeal from General Atomics subsidiary Cotter Corporation and Commonwealth Edison, an Exelon company, in a case over alleged radioactive contamination in the St. Louis, Mo., area, leaving in place an 8th Circuit Court ruling that allows the plaintiffs’ state-law tort claims to proceed under the federal Price-Anderson Act.

The State of Texas has not one but two ongoing federal court challenges to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that could, if successful, turn decades of NRC regulations, precedent, and case law on its head.

The recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the Chevron doctrine marks a significant shift in the landscape of federal decision-making. For more than 40 years, this doctrine has provided a framework wherein courts deferred to federal agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous laws in recognition of the specialized expertise these agencies bring to policy and regulatory development.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the American Nuclear Society.

As if COVID-19 and a rancorous presidential election were not enough, over the next few weeks we will also be dealing with the confirmation of a justice to fill the open seat on the Supreme Court. What does that have to do with the American Nuclear Society and nuclear technology? Well, nothing directly, but there is an interesting connection between the Supreme Court and a notable case on nuclear waste decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in August 2013.