3 ms·

Bureaus of various flavors are delegated their authority by Congress. It was done to let specialists in the various fields make rules according to their domain

Bureaus of various flavors are delegated their authority by Congress. It was done to let specialists in the various fields make rules according to their domain knowledge. They're not elected so they, theoretically, don't have a political agenda they try and fulfill at the cost of their domain. And honestly, even if these laws had to be rubber stamped by congress or the judiciary, they would be deferring to the very same specialists. As an aside, in our Democratic Republic, laws are also created by judges, who are not generally elected into their positions.

anon291 3y ago
> They're not elected so they, theoretically, don't have a political agenda they try and fulfill at the cost of their domain. I'm not sure if this is sarcasm. > And honestly, even if these laws had to be rubber stamped by congress or the judiciary, they would be deferring to the very same specialists. Sure, but making Congress rubber stamp them means there is oversight from the public. The argument is not 'bureaucrats and technocrats should not be involved in crafting rules', but rather 'Congress should also be involved in crafting rules so that the judiciary is not asked to then comment on those rules'. > As an aside, in our Democratic Republic, laws are also created by judges, who are not generally elected into their positions. Laws are not created by judges. This is a major problem which the court is hopefully going to address. Right now, as the article states, they get a lot of cases where they're asked to comment on rules that congress did not pass, and then yes, they start to act like legislators. If they strike this down, then the court will not be asked to legislate so often. Like it or not, a rule backed by an act of congress is much more likely to stand, since the courts are typically reticent to strike down laws passed by Congress itself.
abduhl 3y ago
The specialists are appointed by the President, a position which is entirely political. Appeasing their political boss is one of the specialists’ job requirements. Why? Because if they don’t they get fired. Presidents from both political parties have gone to court in order to ensure this is so. Limiting the power vested in the executive branch is a necessary step to keep our three branch system working. And while common law is created by judges, it is always possible to pass a law that overrides it.

anon291 3y ago

> They're not elected so they, theoretically, don't have a political agenda they try and fulfill at the cost of their domain. I'm not sure if this is sarcasm. > And honestly, even if these laws had to be rubber stamped by congress or the judiciary, they would be deferring to the very same specialists. Sure, but making Congress rubber stamp them means there is oversight from the public. The argument is not 'bureaucrats and technocrats should not be involved in crafting rules', but rather 'Congress should also be involved in crafting rules so that the judiciary is not asked to then comment on those rules'. > As an aside, in our Democratic Republic, laws are also created by judges, who are not generally elected into their positions. Laws are not created by judges. This is a major problem which the court is hopefully going to address. Right now, as the article states, they get a lot of cases where they're asked to comment on rules that congress did not pass, and then yes, they start to act like legislators. If they strike this down, then the court will not be asked to legislate so often. Like it or not, a rule backed by an act of congress is much more likely to stand, since the courts are typically reticent to strike down laws passed by Congress itself.

abduhl 3y ago

The specialists are appointed by the President, a position which is entirely political. Appeasing their political boss is one of the specialists’ job requirements. Why? Because if they don’t they get fired. Presidents from both political parties have gone to court in order to ensure this is so. Limiting the power vested in the executive branch is a necessary step to keep our three branch system working. And while common law is created by judges, it is always possible to pass a law that overrides it.