A passage discussing administrative law outlines the following principle: A court must defer to a government agency's interpretation of a statute if the statute is inherently ambiguous, the agency's interpretation is reasonable, and the agency has not contradicted its own prior formal interpretations without providing a detailed, reasoned explanation for the change.
Based on this principle, if a statute governing emissions is found to be ambiguous and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issues a reasonable new interpretation that contradicts its formal interpretation from five years prior while failing to provide any explanation for the change, a court must defer to the EPA's new interpretation.
Answer: Answer
Answer
False
The statement is false because the scenario explicitly states the EPA failed to provide any explanation for contradicting its prior formal interpretation. According to the principle, providing a detailed, reasoned explanation is a necessary condition for a court to defer when an agency contradicts its past interpretations.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
Applying passage principles requires strict adherence to all necessary conditions and qualifiers mentioned in the text.