"Does ERISA allow retirement plan managers to consider factors that are not material to financial performance when making investment decisions affecting workers' retirement savings? We do not venture an answer -- at least not yet. This case, while featuring two administrations' ping-ponging directives, turns fundamentally on the words that Congress chose: What investment duties does ERISA prescribe and proscribe for plan fiduciaries? In upholding the [DOL's] reading, the district court relied upon the decades-old Chevron deference doctrine. But eleven days before we heard oral argument in this appeal, the Supreme Court decided two landmark cases ... that discarded Chevron and pared back agencies' leeway to interpret their own statutory authority. Given the upended legal landscape, and our status as a court of review, not first view, we vacate and remand so that the district court can reassess the merits." [Utah v. Su, No. 23-11097 (5th Cir. Jul. 18, 2024)]

MORE >>