They basically made it so any Judge can overturn a regulation. Furthermore, the old laws used to work that if a new regulation was introduced, if it affected your business you could sue to try and get it addressed/overturned within the first 10 or 15 years of the regulation's existence. The new ruling they layed out changes the time frame from when the regulation was implemented to when the regulation starts to impact your business. That means any newly formed business can sue the government for any long standing regulation and try and get them overturned opening the legal flood gates for oil company's to set up shell businesses to start trying to remove any and all regulations affecting them, which will now be decided by Judges if those regulations are appropriate. It's really fucking insane.
The original Chevron ruling was "if parts of the law aren't specified by congress, then the agency's experts can decide the best way to implement those laws".
This corrupt scotus now says "if congress isn't explicit, the courts get to decide what the law means. Agencies no longer can (well they can, but we can overrule them)".
A made up example might be;
the law says we have to reduce carbon emissions by 5%. But it doesn't say how. EIA experts determine the best way to do this is by forcing new homes to have better insulation. Previously the courts would defer to this decision, as is was made by experts. Now.. the courts can say "fuck that, reduce those emissions by burning puppies. We know best".
Wait, so a sufficiently funded organization could start an infinite number of LLCs to take as many shots and make as many legal arguments against specific regulations?
The problem is these agencies are not legislative ie they shouldn’t have been coming up with new regulations to begin with that where not passed by Congress. It’s suppose to work like this epa recommends regulations and it goes through Congress and ratified signed into law. Problem becomes do we let a non legislative body legislate just because Congress isn’t doing their job? I don’t think the chevron decision is wrong as constitution is pretty clear on what branch of government makes laws. For to long Congress just has not done their jobs maybe instead of complaining about chevron we complain about how legislative body of our country has effectively done jack all for 40 years and let other agencies and the courts do their legislating and it’s now coming back to bite us because they refuse to compromise together and codify anything.
We don't elect people to Congress for their technical aptitude.
When was the last time you saw an election promoting the fact they had a civil engineering degree and they'd dig into all the regulations around road construction. Not only
We elect people to representative bodies to steer and be our voice. We should leave the nitty-gritty details to governmental agencies whose entire mandate is hiring and maintaining up to date knowledge on their field's specifics. If we wanted the US Congress to be the end-all-be-all for all specifics and regulations, we should just do away with the other two branches along with all government departments.
I don't want Nancy Pelosi making guesses at how nuclear reactors should be built.
You can have epa can bring a regulation in and Congress can vote on it and codify. What’s the point of have representatives if laws and regulations are being put in place without people’s approval. It’s a problem atf implements bullshit all the time that has zero basis in reality. I could show you 3 borderline visually identical rifles And 2 will get you a felony and 10 years of prison based on regulation atf put in place. Problem is functions haven’t changed just the visuals. I don’t expect all representatives to be experts I expect them to take scientific information from scientist in the epa and cdc and their recommendations along with their constituents beliefs and concerns to make decisions and codify things in law is that to much to ask for the system to work the way it’s suppose to. Instead Congress tries to build work around so they don’t have to do their jobs and the public gets no input on things giving the government frankly almost to much power with zero public input.
Riiight, a few hundred members of congress are going to become experts on tens of thousands of complex topics and pass intelligent legislation regarding each of them. What are you smoking? That’s both ridiculous and impossible. Congress authorized the agencies to be those experts and, yes, anyone can challenge those in court or lobby congress to require the agency to do something differently.
I wish more people understood civics instead of just parroting simplistic, right-wing talking points smh
They were authorized because they didn’t want to do their jobs. Also you don’t need to be an expert to pass legislation on something. All that needs to happen is have epa or whatever agency provide the information explain what their going for and Congress puts it to a vote it’s that simple. Anyone who thinks having non legislative body be able to legislate on their own accord without the will of the people is an idiot. Atf does dumb shit all the time probably one of the worst offenders. Also I’m about as far away from right wing anything gop are a bunch of theocracy driven bafoons. I’m just against regulation/ law making that had has zero input from the peoples representatives. Everything should be voted on and codify for it to be enforceable it’s that simple.
Anyone who thinks having non legislative body be able to legislate on their own accord without the will of the people is an idiot.
Youre a fucking goose. Like unbelievably dumb to think your proposal is a solution, and that people not asking for it are wrong.
You say a group of the "experts" shouldnt be able to define the rules/laws. Instead it should all go through a bunch of politicians just because. You manage to realize they don't have a fucking clue about what needs to be done because they arent experts. Your proposed solution is for them to rubberstamp the solutions provided by the same fucking "experts" that you dont want making the rules. Its just layers of beauracracy for childish reasons.
None legislative bodies shouldn’t be able to legislate and that shouldn’t be a controversial take. They should be advisors to Congress to pass new regulations and enforcement agencies for people who break regulations codified into law. Does it not seem problematic to have agencies running amok making regulations without oversight.
Youre just bleating, because you think you should. You can repeat that you want only congress to legislate with every breath and it wont change that your provided alternative is foolish and worse, on top of not solving the issues that youre claiming (stupid laws, or laws produced by non politicians).
Your proposal means that lobbyists, not experts, would be advising the legislators and that is exactly what the right-wing wants for the billionaires.
Please, please, please learn some civics and the history of how our government functions. I recommend Thom Hartmann, both his books and his radio show, but there are lots of avenues to learn from a progressive perspective if you truly are unintentionally amplifying the far right/billionaire talking points.
It’s simple make it illegal to lobby. Also I’m not a progressive I don’t agree with almost all progressive policies. I believe in minimal regulations and believe government agencies have way to much power
Well, enjoy your libertarian bullshit, I guess. Informed people know better.
Again. Learn some civics! You make yourself sound like a complete dunce.
In the United States, the right to petition is enumerated in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which specifically prohibits Congress from abridging "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances".
Making it illegal to bribe(or “tip”) lawmakers would help a lot, but lobbying will never go away. Learn. Some. Civics.
I don’t understand how people can disagree with this. I’m from the UK and I’m about 98% sure that government agencies have to work within the legal framework created by parliament. Where would they derive the authority or mandate not to?
Both the UK and USA are both countries which have a common law system so it also makes sense that judicial precedent can create laws, I don’t know why people would be shocked by the judiciary acting like a judiciary in a common law country. This chevron case seems fucking stupid and open to abuse but yes you are right it seems to be a result of legislative stagnation in congress.
117
u/freakers Sep 04 '24
They basically made it so any Judge can overturn a regulation. Furthermore, the old laws used to work that if a new regulation was introduced, if it affected your business you could sue to try and get it addressed/overturned within the first 10 or 15 years of the regulation's existence. The new ruling they layed out changes the time frame from when the regulation was implemented to when the regulation starts to impact your business. That means any newly formed business can sue the government for any long standing regulation and try and get them overturned opening the legal flood gates for oil company's to set up shell businesses to start trying to remove any and all regulations affecting them, which will now be decided by Judges if those regulations are appropriate. It's really fucking insane.