Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass'n

Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued December 1, 2014 Decided March 9, 2015
Full case name	Thomas E. Perez, Secretary of Labor, et al. v. Mortgage Bankers Association, et al. Jerome Nickols, et al. v. Mortgage Bankers Association
Docket nos.	13-1041 13-1052
Citations	575 U.S. 92 (more) 135 S. Ct. 1199; 191 L. Ed. 2d 186
Case history
Prior	Mortg. Bankers Ass'n v. Harris, 720 F.3d 966, 405 U.S. App. D.C. 429 (D.C. Cir. 2013)
Holding
Notice-and-comment procedures are not required when agencies enact interpretive rules, and they should not be required to make subsequent interpretations.
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Case opinions
Majority	Sotomayor, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan; Alito (except Part III–B)
Concurrence	Alito (in part)
Concurrence	Scalia (in judgment)
Concurrence	Thomas (in judgment)
Laws applied
Administrative Procedure Act

Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, 575 U.S. 92 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the D.C. Circuit's Paralyzed Veterans doctrine is contrary to a clear reading of the Administrative Procedure Act and "improperly imposes on agencies an obligation beyond the Act's maximum procedural requirements."^[1]