5 ms·

Yet the Chevron decision empowers agencies to make rules independent of Congress in cases where the rules don't already exist or are unclear. https://en.wikipe

Yet the Chevron decision empowers agencies to make rules independent of Congress in cases where the rules don't already exist or are unclear. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevron_U.S.A.,_Inc._v._Natural_Resources_Defense_Council,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevron_U.S.A.,_Inc._v._Natura.... Unsurprisingly, Kavanaugh and the rest of the conservatives would prefer this approach be relegated to history. Of course, the areas of particular interest that he cites as examples (securities e.g, finance, communications, and environmental laws) just happen to be those where the two parties could not possibly be further apart in their approaches. https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/01/supreme-court-likely-to-discard-chevron/ https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/01/supreme-court-likely-to-d...

fallingknife 2y ago
It seems to me that the Chevron doctrine has essentially created a fourth branch of government with minimal democratic oversight. It feels like an end run around the constitution. In many cases the agencies exercise legislative, executive, and judicial powers all at the same time.
- chrisfinazzo 2y ago
  Congress, in its current state is a sclerotic body barely capable of doing routine committee work that doesn't even rise to the level of passing laws. They had their chance...and failed spectacularly.
moduspol 2y ago
Also gun laws. Any firearm enthusiast can tell you how inconsistent and incoherent various ATF rulings and determinations have been.
- chrisfinazzo 2y ago
  You lost me at "firearm enthusiast." Try again when US gun laws look more like Japan's -- including an assault weapons ban. https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/08/asia/japan-gun-laws-abe-shooting-intl-hnk/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/08/asia/japan-gun-laws-abe-shoot...
  - moduspol 2y ago
    I don't see the relevance to the topic being discussed. The fact remains that the ATF enjoys the ability to unilaterally revise firearm policy well beyond what many find reasonable without a change in law made by Congress.
    - chrisfinazzo 2y ago
      This scenario is precisely why the outcome of Chevron is useful -- and, I'd argue, vital in addressing areas where legislation is needed, even if we still disagree about what shape it might take. Congress' process takes too long to adapt to conditions on the ground. The ATF has a focused mandate to study and set policy in this area without waiting for Congress to consider the issue. It might not be perfect and is still subject to political influencing as the makeup of the committee changes based on appointments, but at least something gets done. Regarding the FCC, there is some prioritization based on the type of traffic served, but it's fairly commonsense in its approach and the committee recognized that a complete lack of regulation wasn't in the public's best interest. The idea that everything is left to Congress -- or ignored, as the case may be -- creates a situation where good ideas don't develop into meaningful legislation or the bad ones get implemented over the will of the majority. Again, not only does this not happen in parliamentary systems, it's not possible because the people debating the issue are all on the same side. They all agree on the desired outcome, it's rather a question of how far they want to go.

fallingknife 2y ago

It seems to me that the Chevron doctrine has essentially created a fourth branch of government with minimal democratic oversight. It feels like an end run around the constitution. In many cases the agencies exercise legislative, executive, and judicial powers all at the same time.

chrisfinazzo 2y ago
Congress, in its current state is a sclerotic body barely capable of doing routine committee work that doesn't even rise to the level of passing laws. They had their chance...and failed spectacularly.

moduspol 2y ago

Also gun laws. Any firearm enthusiast can tell you how inconsistent and incoherent various ATF rulings and determinations have been.

chrisfinazzo 2y ago
You lost me at "firearm enthusiast." Try again when US gun laws look more like Japan's -- including an assault weapons ban. https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/08/asia/japan-gun-laws-abe-shooting-intl-hnk/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/08/asia/japan-gun-laws-abe-shoot...
- moduspol 2y ago
  I don't see the relevance to the topic being discussed. The fact remains that the ATF enjoys the ability to unilaterally revise firearm policy well beyond what many find reasonable without a change in law made by Congress.
  - chrisfinazzo 2y ago
    This scenario is precisely why the outcome of Chevron is useful -- and, I'd argue, vital in addressing areas where legislation is needed, even if we still disagree about what shape it might take. Congress' process takes too long to adapt to conditions on the ground. The ATF has a focused mandate to study and set policy in this area without waiting for Congress to consider the issue. It might not be perfect and is still subject to political influencing as the makeup of the committee changes based on appointments, but at least something gets done. Regarding the FCC, there is some prioritization based on the type of traffic served, but it's fairly commonsense in its approach and the committee recognized that a complete lack of regulation wasn't in the public's best interest. The idea that everything is left to Congress -- or ignored, as the case may be -- creates a situation where good ideas don't develop into meaningful legislation or the bad ones get implemented over the will of the majority. Again, not only does this not happen in parliamentary systems, it's not possible because the people debating the issue are all on the same side. They all agree on the desired outcome, it's rather a question of how far they want to go.