4 ms·

Let’s be unpopular today… The Board may be a good thing, it may be a bad thing, ane plaintiffs have an agenda (100%). But the court is not supposed to rule on

Let’s be unpopular today… The Board may be a good thing, it may be a bad thing, ane plaintiffs have an agenda (100%). But the court is not supposed to rule on that at all, or what is right and wrong. It’s supposed to rule on the law. If the NLRB they’re operating a parallel court system outside of the regular court system, where they’re both a prosecutor outside normal Executive Branch oversight, and a judge outside the Judicial Branch, that’s exactly the sort of thing a Supreme Court full of (establishment) conservatives is going to strike down, not because they hate labor (though it might also be true) but because it violates the power structures prescribed by the Constitution, and their philosophy is that these should actually be upheld. The legislature doesn’t just get to set that sort of a thing up to be independent of the other two branches, any more than they get to have a general police power; it’s a usurpation.

woodruffw 3y ago
> The legislature doesn’t just get to set that sort of a thing up to be independent of the other two branches, any more than they get to have a general police power; it’s a usurpation. This is a profound misunderstanding of how checks and balances work. The legislature absolutely has the ability to produce statues and dictate their regulation, and the judicial branch absolutely has the ability to conduct judicial review over statues and whether their regulation exceeds the scope of the proscribed statue. Neither has supremacy over either; they're equally empowered branches of the government. What the judicial branch isn't empowered to do is to diminish the regulatory authority of the legislative branch. It can review individual laws and their regulatory scope, but it can't erase Article I, Section 8 itself.
feedforward 3y ago
This is the argument conservatives made in the 1950s and 1960s against blacks having the right to vote, drink from water fountains, swim in public swimming pools, sit anywhere on a bus etc. They said they were not against blacks per se, but against federal encroachment, communists in the civil rights movement etc.
jrs235 3y ago
Corporations are created [and recognized] by and UNDER Government. Their owners are provided the privilege of limited liability because of it. IF they wish to not be under the regulations then the owners can operate outside of their corporate veil and be fully liable for any and all actions they collectively take...

woodruffw 3y ago

> The legislature doesn’t just get to set that sort of a thing up to be independent of the other two branches, any more than they get to have a general police power; it’s a usurpation. This is a profound misunderstanding of how checks and balances work. The legislature absolutely has the ability to produce statues and dictate their regulation, and the judicial branch absolutely has the ability to conduct judicial review over statues and whether their regulation exceeds the scope of the proscribed statue. Neither has supremacy over either; they're equally empowered branches of the government. What the judicial branch isn't empowered to do is to diminish the regulatory authority of the legislative branch. It can review individual laws and their regulatory scope, but it can't erase Article I, Section 8 itself.

feedforward 3y ago

This is the argument conservatives made in the 1950s and 1960s against blacks having the right to vote, drink from water fountains, swim in public swimming pools, sit anywhere on a bus etc. They said they were not against blacks per se, but against federal encroachment, communists in the civil rights movement etc.

jrs235 3y ago

Corporations are created [and recognized] by and UNDER Government. Their owners are provided the privilege of limited liability because of it. IF they wish to not be under the regulations then the owners can operate outside of their corporate veil and be fully liable for any and all actions they collectively take...