> On the flip side, imagine if a crony in the EPA could arbitrarily ban products from companies that didn't donate enough to a certain political party. That's

> On the flip side, imagine if a crony in the EPA could arbitrarily ban products from companies that didn't donate enough to a certain political party. That's a silly strawman. In that case you'd sue for inappropriate regulation and win, just like this case, but better because you'd be right. The EPA's charter doesn't allow for political fundraising, it would be a trivial case to win. The complaint here isn't that courts shouldn't have the ability to oversee government agencies to make sure they're doing it right. The complaint here is that the fifth circuit is deliberately interfering with the operation of a government agency doing what it is supposed to do.