> is that the Supreme Court of the United States made it their concern by rejecting an established practice of deferring to expert regulators instead of electable people who probably lack the relevant knowledge and experience

The current Supreme Court unfortunately unfortunately seems to lack the knowledge and experience to recognize the logic in this thinking (or just doesn't care because it doesn't fit their agenda)

I don’t see why you think Chevron deference would have been of any use for anyone who wanted to preserve video games. Current regulations unambiguously allow EULAs, and Chevron deference is only about how ambiguous regulations are resolved during a trial. No ambiguity = no deference to the agency’s interpretation of the law.