Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/13-1041_0861.pdf
Page Number: 19

2

PEREZ v. MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSN. 

Opinion of ALITO, J. 

lems.  At  least  one  of  the  three  factors  noted  above,  how-
ever,  concerns  a  matter  that  can  be  addressed  by  this 
Court.    The  opinions  of  JUSTICE  SCALIA  and  JUSTICE 
THOMAS offer substantial reasons why the Seminole Rock 
doctrine  may  be  incorrect. 
See  also  Christopher  v. 
SmithKline  Beecham  Corp.,  567  U. S.  ___,  ___–___  (2012) 
(slip  op.,  at  13–14)  (citing,  inter  alia,  Manning,  Constitu-
tional  Structure  and  Judicial  Deference  to  Agency  Inter-
pretations of Agency Rules, 96 Colum. L. Rev. 612 (1996)).
I await a case in which the validity of Seminole Rock may
be explored through full briefing and argument.