This op-ed first published in Planet Detroit.

Above photo by Thomas Park.

My toddler daughter wakes up every morning, and we eat breakfast together. She munches oats, and we listen to music. During the day, I work and she plays—hopping in sprinklers, playing with her toys, or taking a dip in Traverse City’s East Bay. We might drive to the library or visit the grocery store in the evening. It’s probably not perfect, but it feels pretty idyllic to us. 

But the recent overturning of the Supreme Court’s long-standing Chevron doctrine threatens many of those simple moments we take for granted. That’s because each of those seemingly small parts of my daughter’s day and our everyday lives relies on responsible regulation by federal agencies and the experts they employ. The potential risks are significant, and we must be aware of them.

Take her little bowl of oats, for example.

First, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sets the baseline tolerances for pesticide residues. What about the health benefits claims on the oatmeal box? The U.S. Food and Drug Administration evaluated them. The U.S. Department of Agriculture sets and enforces other food safety precautions for things like milk. Together, these agencies ensure that labels communicate relevant nutrition information to consumers and that food is largely safely grown, processed, and stored.  

The Consumer Product Safety Commission regulates even my daughters’ toys to ensure they are safe and free of harmful chemicals like lead or mercury. The lights that shine down on our table as we eat dinner are regulated by the Department of Energy and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. These agencies play a crucial role in ensuring the safety of the products we use daily, reassuring us.

As my toddler runs through sprinklers in the lawn, I think of kids who lived here before. Our neighborhood was deemed a Superfund site in 1985 because of trichloroethylene (TCE) groundwater plume and PFAS contamination still being cleaned up here.

All of the houses on our street were on well water then, and without federal oversight, local kids like my daughter would probably still be playing in (and drinking) contaminated water.

You get the picture—federal agencies touch almost every aspect of our lives. There are currently 438 registered federal agencies and sub-agencies. Sure, the standards they set are imperfect—they’re made by humans, and political influence still happens.

They could be more stringent and protective, but at least their core regulations are based on peer-reviewed science. They are shaped by experts who have spent careers working to understand an ever-evolving body of research in their fields.

Experts are trained to keep food, transportation systems, and water safe and the lights on.

However, because of the recent Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which dismantled the Chevron doctrine, the deference that once fell to agencies to make those regulatory decisions now falls to the courts. In undoing four decades of legal precedent, we now will rely on judges who have little to no technical expertise in the issues they’ve been charged to regulate. 

I’d rather my daughters’ oats be regulated by someone with a nutrition, science, or public health background than by a politically appointed judge with a law degree. 

We must remember that judges are appointed by politicians. As citizens, staying informed and engaged in the political process is crucial, especially when understanding the positions and qualifications of judicial appointees.

By participating in the electoral process and advocating for the importance of science in regulatory decisions, we can help ensure that our lives and the simple things we take for granted are protected. Our engagement is not just meaningful; it’s necessary.

Ashley Rudzinski is Groundwork’s Climate & Environment Program Director.
ashley.rudzinski@groundworkcenter.org