Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/13-1041_0861.pdf
Page Number: 6.0

Cite as:  575 U. S. ____ (2015) 

3 

Opinion of the Court 

tive  rule,”1  is  not  further  defined  by  the  APA,  and  its 
precise meaning is the source of much scholarly and judi-
cial debate.  See generally Pierce, Distinguishing Legisla-
tive  Rules  From  Interpretative  Rules,  52  Admin.  L. Rev.
547 (2000); Manning, Nonlegislative Rules, 72 Geo. Wash.
L. Rev.  893  (2004).    We  need  not,  and  do  not,  wade  into 
that debate here.  For our purposes, it suffices to say that
the  critical  feature  of  interpretive  rules  is  that  they  are
“issued  by  an  agency  to  advise  the  public  of  the  agency’s 
construction  of  the  statutes  and  rules  which  it  adminis-
ters.”  Shalala  v.  Guernsey  Memorial  Hospital,  514  U. S. 
87,  99  (1995)  (internal  quotation  marks  omitted).    The 
absence  of  a  notice-and-comment  obligation  makes  the
process  of  issuing  interpretive  rules  comparatively  easier 
for  agencies  than  issuing  legislative  rules.  But  that  con-
venience comes at a price: Interpretive rules “do not have 
the  force  and  effect  of  law  and  are  not  accorded  that 
weight in the adjudicatory process.”  Ibid. 

B 
These  cases  began  as  a  dispute  over  efforts  by  the  De-
partment  of  Labor  to  determine  whether  mortgage-loan 
officers  are  covered  by  the  Fair  Labor  Standards  Act  of 
1938 (FLSA), 52 Stat. 1060, as amended, 29 U. S. C. §201 
et seq.  The  FLSA  “establishe[s]  a  minimum  wage  and 
overtime  compensation  for  each  hour  worked  in  excess  of
40  hours  in  each  workweek”  for  many  employees.    Integ-
rity  Staffing  Solutions,  Inc.  v.  Busk,  574  U. S.  ___,  ___ 
(2014) (slip op., at 3).  Certain classes of employees, how-
ever,  are  exempt  from  these  provisions.  Among  these 
exempt  individuals  are  those  “employed  in  a  bona  fide 
executive,  administrative,  or  professional  capacity  . . .  or 
in the capacity of outside salesman . . . .”  §213(a)(1).  The 

—————— 

1 The latter is the more common phrasing today, and the one we use 

throughout this opinion.