Chevron has been overruled. The second court no longer considers whether application of the new rule would be inequitable or undermine reliance interests. This language holds out the option of announcing a rule with wholly prospective force, inapplicable to the parties in the case that announces the rule. But a second line of cases, including Firestone, withholds the option of complete prospectivity when the rule concerns jurisdiction. The Court declined.
Courts created by statute can have no jurisdiction but such as the statute confers.
The age-old rule that a court may not in any case, even in the interest of justice, extend its jurisdiction where none exists has always worked injustice in particular cases. Parties often spend years litigating claims only to learn that their efforts and expense were wasted in a court that lacked jurisdiction. . . . Such situations inhere in the very nature of jurisdictional lines, for as our cases aptly illustrate, few jurisdictional lines can be so finely drawn as to leave no room for disagreement on close cases. Jurisdiction means adjudicatory power. Equitable considerations are altogether irrelevant when a court lacks adjudicatory power.