3 ms·
That agencies' powers are "unchecked" is an odd conclusion to draw from an article announcing that Cato's position won and the Supreme Court has concluded that
by pdabbadabba 11y ago
That agencies' powers are "unchecked" is an odd conclusion to draw from an article announcing that Cato's position won and the Supreme Court has concluded that farmer's must be paid for their confiscated raisins.
- qq66 11y agoIt shouldn't have needed the Supreme Court to rule that the government can't take arbitrary amounts of a farmer's crop without payment.
- StavrosK 11y agoMaybe the OP means the fact that someone had to sue in order to get paid for their confiscated property?
- pdabbadabba 11y agoMaybe. But still, that's not evidence that the agency is unchecked so much as a complaint that it takes too much effort in some cases to check it. And more importantly, this was not exactly a case where the agency was running amok in blatant violation of the law. It was a genuinely controversial legal proposition whether personal property was covered by the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment until this case was decided. Most legal checks on agency action do not require enunciation of new principles of Constitutional law by the Supreme Court, so this is not a great example.