The Supreme Court decision to overturn the Chevron Doctrine—a 40+-year-old rule that required courts to defer to federal agencies’ “reasonable” interpretations of “ambiguous” statutes—may mean that a sea change in regulatory activity—and possibly legislation—is likely.

A federal district court in Texas has stayed a Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS’) Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) rule that sets a fixed administrative fee and consequently prevents payment to health insurance agents and brokers for advice recommending certain managed care plans. In Am. For Beneficiary Choice v. HHS and Council for Medicare Choice v. HHS, the court found that the plaintiffs demonstrated a substantial likelihood that they would prevail on the merits. The merits include plaintiffs’ claims that the rule would “upend the regulatory status quo, dramatically limiting administrative fees that Congress did not intend” for CMS to regulate.

In Moore v. United States, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) sidestepped the question of whether it is constitutional to tax unrealized income—but four opinions (two concurring and two dissenting) suggest that at least four of the current SCOTUS justices might in another case find it is unconstitutional to tax income until it is realized.

Last month Republican lawmakers introduced motions to block the new rule raising the salary threshold for the white-collar exemption to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) overtime (OT) rule. Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) introduced the Congressional Review Act (CRA) motion in the House; Sen. Mike Braun (R-IN) introduced it in the Senate.

In Connelly vs. United States, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled that life insurance proceeds increased the value of a closely held business’ stock and therefore had to be included in valuation of the company for estate tax purposes. The ruling impacts some buy-sell agreements where the life insurance is owned by the company rather than by the individuals who own the company.