5 ms·
Interesting definition of a power grab. Unelected agencies and courts making laws ex nihilo isn't a power grab, but moving power back towards the only directly
by mmaniac 2y ago
Interesting definition of a power grab. Unelected agencies and courts making laws ex nihilo isn't a power grab, but moving power back towards the only directly democratically accountable branch of government and not even the branch which made the decision is.
- lowmagnet 2y agoCongress needs the ability to defer implementation to a technocratic agency. Without it, Congress would make every single rule within every agency and it would have to have approximately 35,000+ members to keep up! I don't think individual congregants should have to have deep knowledge on the CFR to represent the people!
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- readthenotes1 2y agoI guess the idea is that Democracy is only good when it supports the position I take; otherwise, it is dangerous to the people.
- kllrnohj 2y agoThat's not what this does. This moved the power from agencies to the courts, not to Congress. Congress always had the ability to clarify or change the laws. The problem was how to interpret those laws. Under Chevron if the agency made a reasonable interpretation of the law as decided by a court, then the agencies interpretation was followed. Under this new ruling, sole interpretation of the regulatory laws is now in the hands of the courts. Nothing whatsoever was returned to Congress.
- mmaniac 2y agoThanks for the correction.
- KevinMS 2y agoIf the interpretation of the law is too vague the court determines its unenforceable then congress has to make a better law. It doesn't shift the power to the courts.
- kllrnohj 2y agoAnd what exactly happens in the meantime? That thing is now decided to be unregulated by the courts. There's no atomicity to "kick back to Congress" and Congress always had the power to override agencies regardless. This is 100% unambiguously a power shift from agencies to courts. The opinion literally stated as much: > Perhaps most fundamentally, Chevron’s presumption is misguided because agencies have no special competence in resolving statutory ambiguities. Courts do. - Chief Justice John Roberts
- KevinMS 2y ago> And what exactly happens in the meantime? That thing is now decided to be unregulated by the courts. If something cant be written into an actual law, maybe the law shouldnt exist? Why must we err on the side of regulation? Congress is supposed to be doing its job representing voters and writing clear bills, not writing fill in the blank laws. Make those you vote into office accountable for their responsibilities.
- HDThoreaun 2y ago> Make those you vote into office accountable for their responsibilities. This sounds nice but it doesnt work. Americans widely despise congress but like their own representative. Telling voters "make your representative accountable" will not fix anything. I would like for congress to be an effective body that is able to pass laws that are widely popular, but we can all see that that just is not the reality we are working with.
- KevinMS 2y agoMaybe I'm old fashioned but I would like my elected officials who are hired to write the laws to actually write the laws.