Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/13-1041_0861.pdf
Page Number: 10

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

7 

Opinion of the Court 

text of the APA’s rulemaking provisions, and it improperly 
imposes  on  agencies  an  obligation  beyond  the  “maximum
procedural  requirements”  specified  in  the  APA,  Vermont 
Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense 
Council, Inc., 435 U. S. 519, 524 (1978). 

A 

The  text  of  the  APA  answers  the  question  presented. 
Section 4 of the APA provides that “notice of proposed rule
making  shall  be  published  in  the  Federal  Register.”  5 
U. S. C.  §553(b).    When  such  notice  is  required  by  the
APA,  “the  agency  shall  give  interested  persons  an  oppor-
tunity to participate in the rule making.”  §553(c).  But §4
further states that unless “notice or hearing is required by
statute,”  the  Act’s  notice-and-comment  requirement  “does
not  apply  . . .  to  interpretative  rules.”    §553(b)(A).    This 
exemption  of  interpretive  rules  from  the  notice-and-
comment  process  is  categorical,  and  it  is  fatal  to  the  rule
announced in Paralyzed Veterans. 

Rather  than  examining  the  exemption  for  interpretive
rules contained in §4(b)(A) of the APA, the D. C. Circuit in 
Paralyzed  Veterans  focused  its  attention  on §1  of  the  Act. 
That section defines “rule making” to include not only the 
initial  issuance  of  new  rules,  but  also  “repeal[s]”  or 
“amend[ments]”  of  existing  rules.    See  §551(5).  Because 
notice-and-comment  requirements  may  apply  even  to 
these later agency actions, the court reasoned, “allow[ing]
an  agency  to  make  a  fundamental  change  in  its  interpre-
tation  of  a  substantive  regulation  without  notice  and 
comment”  would  undermine  the  APA’s  procedural  frame-
work.  117 F. 3d, at 586. 

This reading of the APA conflates the differing purposes
of  §§1  and  4  of  the  Act.  Section  1  defines  what  a  rule-
making  is.  It  does not,  however,  say  what  procedures  an 
agency must use when it engages in rulemaking.  That is 
the purpose of §4.  And §4 specifically exempts interpretive