The Administrative State May Soon Be Devastated

[Rightguide]

Business

Supreme Court may soon undercut Biden’s regulatory regime​

ByKaelan Deese
https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php...t-may-soon-undercut-bidens-regulatory-regime/
June 10, 2024 6:30 am


The future of the administrative state hangs in the balance. Supreme Court justices will soon decide in a pair of cases whether to reverse a decades-old precedent known as the Chevron deference that would curb federal agencies’ power to regulate everything from Wall Street to the stove in your kitchen. This Washington Examiner series will look at how a departure from this precedent could rip up the regulation nation. Part 1 will focus on the underlying court case.

The Supreme Court will soon issue a ruling that could reshape the balance of power between federal agencies and the judiciary, give small litigants due process leverage, and disrupt President Joe Biden‘s progressive regulatory agenda.

The nearly 40-year-old precedent known as the Chevron doctrine tells courts to defer to federal agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous statutes, which many business and industry groups say has led to stifling regulations. Conversely, the federal government contends the precedent respects courts’ authority to interpret law while also respecting Congress’s ability to delegate power to agencies in the executive branch, according to Justice Department legal briefs.

Major industry groups encouraging the high court to diminish or toss out Chevron include oil giants such as Chevron and Exxon Mobil. Agriculture giants such as the North American Meat Institute have also urged the Supreme Court to move away from broad agency deference, as have trade groups representing e-cigarette companies.

More here: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...t-may-soon-undercut-bidens-regulatory-regime/

This could be the most historical decision in memory.

 

[ll74]

All that will happen is the court will end up being clogged with cases that normally wouldn't come up.

 

[Rightguide]

All that will happen is the court will end up being clogged with cases that normally wouldn't come up.

I don't think you understand the case.

 

[ll74]

I don't think you understand the case.

Of course you do.

 

[Rightguide]

Of course you do.

Absolutely.

 

[Bray123]

Damn, we're treating Facebook as a source now...

 

[MajorRewrite]

Back in the 60s and 70s there was widespread agreement that active regulation of businesses was obviously good and necessary because of horrific things companies were caught doing.

DDT was killing off wildlife. Thalidomide caused terrible birth defects. So many chemicals were dumped in waterways that rivers literally caught fire. Heavy smog was a problem in many cities. Air pollution in one factory town was so bad it etched window glass. Lead in paint and gasoline hindered brain development. Etc. etc.

Then Reagan came along and convinced the right wing that companies were pure as snow and didn’t need regulation. Anyone that believes that is hopelessly naive.

 

[DeluxAuto]

*May soon*

So many of Reichguide's threads are solely based on histrionic hypothetical bullshit.

Just look at his thread titles.

 

[Lazaran]

Some things to consider:

https://rollcall.com/2024/06/05/what-would-congress-do-without-chevron-deference/

A ruling against the current Chevron doctrine / deference would be more legislative and judicial chaos and gridlock.

That ^ is EXACTLY what the corporations want, so they can exploit that chaos and gridlock to their selfish and environmentally destructive advantage.



JFC

SAD!!!.

 

[RoryN]

*May soon*

So many of Reichguide's threads are solely based on histrionic hypothetical bullshit.

Just look at his thread titles.

This is a good point. Never noticed before.

 

[DeluxAuto]

This is a good point. Never noticed before.

It further proves that he's a gullible moron who gets sucked in by sensational headlines.

 

[ll74]

It further proves that he's a gullible moron who gets sucked in by sensational headlines.

Histrionics is his default translation. He doesn't speak any other language.

 

[dkovic77]

Damn, we're treating Facebook as a source now...

The examiner does.. and of course wrong guide loves it.

Sourcing doesn’t matter to him.

Daddy Vlady will show him his sourcing when he arrives shortly. Right @Rightguide ?

 

[DeluxAuto]

Histrionics is his default translation. He doesn't speak any other language.

Waking up looking for something to be pissed off about must be a miserable way to go through life.

 

[SmokingFap]

Business

Supreme Court may soon undercut Biden’s regulatory regime​

ByKaelan Deese
https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/business/3029041/supreme-court-may-soon-undercut-bidens-regulatory-regime/
June 10, 2024 6:30 am


The future of the administrative state hangs in the balance. Supreme Court justices will soon decide in a pair of cases whether to reverse a decades-old precedent known as the Chevron deference that would curb federal agencies’ power to regulate everything from Wall Street to the stove in your kitchen. This Washington Examiner series will look at how a departure from this precedent could rip up the regulation nation. Part 1 will focus on the underlying court case.

The Supreme Court will soon issue a ruling that could reshape the balance of power between federal agencies and the judiciary, give small litigants due process leverage, and disrupt President Joe Biden‘s progressive regulatory agenda.

The nearly 40-year-old precedent known as the Chevron doctrine tells courts to defer to federal agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous statutes, which many business and industry groups say has led to stifling regulations. Conversely, the federal government contends the precedent respects courts’ authority to interpret law while also respecting Congress’s ability to delegate power to agencies in the executive branch, according to Justice Department legal briefs.

Major industry groups encouraging the high court to diminish or toss out Chevron include oil giants such as Chevron and Exxon Mobil. Agriculture giants such as the North American Meat Institute have also urged the Supreme Court to move away from broad agency deference, as have trade groups representing e-cigarette companies.

More here: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...t-may-soon-undercut-bidens-regulatory-regime/

This could be the most historical decision in memory.

At first blush, it seems to me to be a decision about whether our capitalist economy should be allowed to function unfettered and let the chips fall where they may, or whether the government has the authority to keep the guardrails up to protect the citizenry.

Yes, I'm aware I'm mixing metaphors there, but the point remains.

 

[MajorRewrite]

A new editorial relevant to this discussion …

Letters from an American: June 9

The belief that liberalism depended on a small government dominated the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, but the rise of industry in the late nineteenth century shifted the relationship between individuals and the government. Was everyone really equal when industrialists were worth millions and commanded state legislatures and Congress, while workers, consumers, and children had little leverage to protect themselves?

The majority of Americans said no, and Theodore Roosevelt agreed. The danger for individuals in their era was not that the government would crush them, but that industrialists would. In order for the government truly to protect the people, Roosevelt argued, it must regulate businesses and support the ability of ordinary Americans to prosper. A true liberal government, one that protected the rights of individuals, must be big enough and strong enough to act as a referee between workers, consumers, and businessmen.

The whole article is good, and includes information key current Republican policy makers.

 

[Lazaran]

A new editorial relevant to this discussion …

Letters from an American: June 9



The whole article is good, and includes information key current Republican policy makers.

"The Deep Corporations"

 

[Rightguide]

At first blush, it seems to me to be a decision about whether our capitalist economy should be allowed to function unfettered and let the chips fall where they may, or whether the government has the authority to keep the guardrails up to protect the citizenry.

Yes, I'm aware I'm mixing metaphors there, but the point remains.

That's not it at all. The question is who writes the laws and who enforces the law. The administrative state has issued regulatory law that exceeds the boundaries of its enabling legislation. A clear violation of the law and the Constitution. So much so that mountains of litigation questioning this authority have been filed and one has finally reached the SCOTUS that may restrain this overreach once and for all.

 

[icanhelp1]

That's not it at all. The question is who writes the laws and who enforces the law. The administrative state has issued regulatory law that exceeds the boundaries of its enabling legislation. A clear violation of the law and the Constitution. So much so that mountains of litigation questioning this authority have been filed and one has finally reached the SCOTUS that may restrain this overreach once and for all.

The EPA is the absolute worst.

 

[Chobham]

That's not it at all. The question is who writes the laws and who enforces the law. The administrative state has issued regulatory law that exceeds the boundaries of its enabling legislation. A clear violation of the law and the Constitution. So much so that mountains of litigation questioning this authority have been filed and one has finally reached the SCOTUS that may restrain this overreach once and for all.

This is exactly the issue at hand. Congress makes law, not unelected, unaccountable, bureaucrats.

 

[SmokingFap]

That's not it at all. The question is who writes the laws and who enforces the law. The administrative state has issued regulatory law that exceeds the boundaries of its enabling legislation. A clear violation of the law and the Constitution. So much so that mountains of litigation questioning this authority have been filed and one has finally reached the SCOTUS that may restrain this overreach once and for all.

All of which will ultimately boil down to whether SCOTUS protects everyday citizens or the profitability of corporations. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

[MajorRewrite]

This is exactly the issue at hand. Congress makes law, not unelected, unaccountable, bureaucrats.

Congress passed the laws. Federal agencies are enforcing the laws. Nonsense spewed by right wing propagandists won’t change that.

 

[Rotadom]

Do you think anyone in the current administration is going to prison or going to be convicted of fraud?

Getting impeached twice?

 

[AlexBailey]

If the Chevron deference goes down it will literally take an act of congress to enact almost any federal regulation to protect the interests of public health, safety, financial services, or environmental protections. The GOP will finally be able to claim a win for businesses who want to buy regulatory influence from local politicians.

Another step towards making America ‘grate’ as it shifts further to the land of the money, for the money, by the money.

And people complain about big monied interests driving the swamp now….

 

[ll74]

The right obviously wants Congressmen like MTG to write complex regulations for companies. I'm sure she knows enough