3 ms·
The NRC (and most other regulatory bodies) predate Chevron deference, so you should count on them sticking around and still doing their thing. A nuclear startu
by lupusreal 2y ago
The NRC (and most other regulatory bodies) predate Chevron deference, so you should count on them sticking around and still doing their thing. A nuclear startup could try taking them to court to circumvent all their rules and build naked nuclear piles in residential neighborhoods or something, but even if they got a federal judge to go along with that, it should be an easy political win for legislators to smack it down with some new more specific laws.
And although the regulatory interpretation of those laws could also be challenged in court, successfully doing so shouldn't be considered a given. Judges generally do have some sense you know, as a class they decide important matters in boring uncontroversial ways across the country every days. The controversial outcomes that make news cycles are newsworthy specifically because they're unusual.
- hanniabu 2y ago> it should be an easy political win for legislators to smack it down with some new more specific laws. Which is a lengthy process and relies on Congress actually being effective and free of corruption, which they aren't.
- nine_k 2y agoWhile agencies may be faster, are they, in general, more effective and less corrupt?
- StewardMcOy 2y agoThan the United States Congress? They're absolutely more effective. Congress may have been an innovative design in 1787, but it's grown into such a pile of misaligned incentives that it's almost completely dysfunctional. As for corruption, I suspect agencies may be more or less corrupt on an individual basis. I don't have any hard data, but I suspect they're less corrupt on average. The Supreme Court has, repeatedly, given Congress members the go-ahead to be almost as corrupt as they want, while they're harsher on executive branch agencies.