Rogers v. United States

when two provisions whose meanings, if examined individually, are clear, but whose meanings, when read together, conflict, it is up to the court to interpret the provisions so that they make sense | when two provisions whose meanings, if examined individually, are clear, but whose meanings, when read together, conflict, it is up to the court to interpret the provisions so that they make sense | conscious avoidance satisfies knowing intent requirement where the matter involves existing facts | “While we ordinarily give great weight to the interpretation of the agency charged with enforcement of the statute we are construing, ... that deference does not extend to the question of judicial review, a matter within the peculiar expertise of the courts.” | conscious avoidance satisfies knowing intent requirement where the matter involves existing facts | approving augmentation to allow information on pesticides | administrative history of Alar controversy