Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf
Page Number: 50

Cite as:  597 U. S. ____ (2022) 

13 

GORSUCH, J., concurring 

that the people’s representatives in Congress have actually
afforded the agency the power it claims. 

B 

At  this  point,  the  question  becomes  what  qualifies  as  a 
clear  congressional  statement  authorizing  an  agency’s  ac-
tion.  Courts have long experience applying clear-statement 
rules throughout the law, and our cases have identified sev-
eral telling clues in this context too.  

First,  courts  must  look  to  the  legislative  provisions  on
which the agency seeks to rely “ ‘with a view to their place 
in  the  overall  statutory  scheme.’ ”    Brown  &  Williamson, 
529 U. S., at 133.  “[O]blique or elliptical language” will not 
supply a clear statement.  Ante, at 18; see Spector v. Nor-
wegian Cruise Line Ltd., 545 U. S. 119, 139 (2005) (plural-
ity opinion) (cautioning against reliance on “broad or gen-
eral language”).  Nor may agencies seek to hide “elephants 
in  mouseholes,”  Whitman  v.  American  Trucking  Assns., 
Inc., 531 U. S. 457, 468 (2001), or rely on “gap filler” provi-
sions, ante, at 20.  So, for example, in MCI this Court re-
jected  the  Federal  Communication  Commission’s  attempt 
to eliminate rate regulation for the telecommunications in-
dustry  based  on  a  “subtle”  provision  that  empowered  the 
FCC  to  “ ‘modify’ ”  rates.    512  U. S.,  at  231.  In  Brown  & 
Williamson, the Court rejected the Food and Drug Admin-
istration’s attempt to regulate cigarettes based a “cryptic”
statutory  provision  that  granted  the  agency  the  power  to
regulate “drugs” and “devices.”  529 U. S., at 126, 156, 160. 
And in Gonzales, the Court doubted that Congress gave the
Attorney  General  “broad  and  unusual  authority”  to  regu-
late drugs for physician-assisted suicide through “oblique” 
statutory language.  546 U. S., at 267.  

Second, courts may examine the age and focus of the stat-
ute the agency invokes in relation to the problem the agency 
seeks to address.  As the Court puts it today, it is unlikely