3 ms·

Given the current make up of the Supreme Court (particularly Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, IIRC), this hail-Mary isn't necessarily that low probability. Several justic

Given the current make up of the Supreme Court (particularly Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, IIRC), this hail-Mary isn't necessarily that low probability. Several justices don't like administrative courts being the law-maker, judge, jury, executioner, and tax collector. I think one's attitude toward this case (independent of Musk / SpaceX) comes down to how much you value separation of powers as a check on government vs consolidation of government power as a check on the power of corporations.

legitster 3y ago
Right, but it would take a lot of steps for it to even make it to the Supreme Court in the first case. As it is this has a huge chance of being instantly dismissed. > consolidation of government power as a check on the power of corporations This might be a good way of putting it. But I personally grew up in an ex-soviet country so my experience is that I am way more afraid of governments than corporations. If you think greedy corporations are bad - you should see what an unchecked "government of the people" can do to their own citizens' water supply.
- Incipient 3y ago
  We rarely see unchecked corporations. Even "checked" corporations do some fairly heinous things. I would say both unchecked corporations and governments are so far into "bad" territory it doesn't matter how bad, both must be prevented from happening.
- rickydroll 3y ago
  privatized water is not any better and arguably worse. I think the difference is level of graft and citizen involvement in management/oversight https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2015/08/02/water-privatization-facts-and-figures/ https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2015/08/02/water-privatiza...
- skissane 3y ago
  > Right, but it would take a lot of steps for it to even make it to the Supreme Court in the first case. As it is this has a huge chance of being instantly dismissed. This is in the 5th Circuit. The 5th Circuit has already ruled that ALJs (administrative law judges) are unconstitutional, [0] a precedent which SpaceX is directly citing in this case–14 times. [1] Indeed, this is basically just copy-pasting the holdings from that judgement against the SEC, and applying them to the NLRB. The only way the NLRB wins given that precedent, is to convince the court that there is some constitutionally significant difference between the SEC's ALJs and its own–and even if the District Court judge were convinced of that, I doubt the 5th Circuit (the most conservative of the federal Courts of Appeal, and with a reputation of being unfriendly to the NLRB) would agree. So no way does this have a "huge chance of being instantly dismissed". However, that 5th circuit ruling is currently being appealed at SCOTUS (SEC v Jaresky). [2] It was argued in late November, so we should have a ruling by late June / early July, possibly even earlier. If SCOTUS upholds the 5th Circuit's ruling, SpaceX very likely wins. If SCOTUS overturns the 5th Circuit's ruling, SpaceX very likely loses. Both sides will readily agree to drag this out until they get that ruling. SpaceX's lawyers aren't really doing anything legally original here, just setting themselves up to potentially benefit from an upcoming SCOTUS ruling, if it happens to go their way. This case is unlikely to ever make it to that level, because that level will have already decided it one way or the other. This is somewhat misleading journalism, trying to make it sound like SpaceX is launching an novel attack on the NLRB, as opposed to just piggy-backing themselves on somebody else's attack on the entire ALJ system. [0] https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/20/20-61007-CV0.pdf https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/20/20-61007-CV0.pd... [1] https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/spacex-vs-nlrb-124cv1.pdf https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/sp... [2] https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/securities-and-exchange-commission-v-jarkesy/ https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/securities-and-e...

legitster 3y ago

Right, but it would take a lot of steps for it to even make it to the Supreme Court in the first case. As it is this has a huge chance of being instantly dismissed. > consolidation of government power as a check on the power of corporations This might be a good way of putting it. But I personally grew up in an ex-soviet country so my experience is that I am way more afraid of governments than corporations. If you think greedy corporations are bad - you should see what an unchecked "government of the people" can do to their own citizens' water supply.

Incipient 3y ago
We rarely see unchecked corporations. Even "checked" corporations do some fairly heinous things. I would say both unchecked corporations and governments are so far into "bad" territory it doesn't matter how bad, both must be prevented from happening.
rickydroll 3y ago
privatized water is not any better and arguably worse. I think the difference is level of graft and citizen involvement in management/oversight https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2015/08/02/water-privatization-facts-and-figures/ https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/2015/08/02/water-privatiza...
skissane 3y ago
> Right, but it would take a lot of steps for it to even make it to the Supreme Court in the first case. As it is this has a huge chance of being instantly dismissed. This is in the 5th Circuit. The 5th Circuit has already ruled that ALJs (administrative law judges) are unconstitutional, [0] a precedent which SpaceX is directly citing in this case–14 times. [1] Indeed, this is basically just copy-pasting the holdings from that judgement against the SEC, and applying them to the NLRB. The only way the NLRB wins given that precedent, is to convince the court that there is some constitutionally significant difference between the SEC's ALJs and its own–and even if the District Court judge were convinced of that, I doubt the 5th Circuit (the most conservative of the federal Courts of Appeal, and with a reputation of being unfriendly to the NLRB) would agree. So no way does this have a "huge chance of being instantly dismissed". However, that 5th circuit ruling is currently being appealed at SCOTUS (SEC v Jaresky). [2] It was argued in late November, so we should have a ruling by late June / early July, possibly even earlier. If SCOTUS upholds the 5th Circuit's ruling, SpaceX very likely wins. If SCOTUS overturns the 5th Circuit's ruling, SpaceX very likely loses. Both sides will readily agree to drag this out until they get that ruling. SpaceX's lawyers aren't really doing anything legally original here, just setting themselves up to potentially benefit from an upcoming SCOTUS ruling, if it happens to go their way. This case is unlikely to ever make it to that level, because that level will have already decided it one way or the other. This is somewhat misleading journalism, trying to make it sound like SpaceX is launching an novel attack on the NLRB, as opposed to just piggy-backing themselves on somebody else's attack on the entire ALJ system. [0] https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/20/20-61007-CV0.pdf https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/20/20-61007-CV0.pd... [1] https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/spacex-vs-nlrb-124cv1.pdf https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/sp... [2] https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/securities-and-exchange-commission-v-jarkesy/ https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/securities-and-e...