3 ms·
It doesn't immediately do so, though. Part of the ruling is that the status quo is maintained; there's no obligation for agencies to proactively remove regulati
by jerf 2y ago
It doesn't immediately do so, though. Part of the ruling is that the status quo is maintained; there's no obligation for agencies to proactively remove regulations in response to how they guess some court somewhere might rule on a hypothetical lawsuit.
So lawsuits have to be filed, first. So they will. Some of them may be resolved by the agencies just rolling over and doing the moral equivalent of pleading guilty, but if I know my principles of bureaucracy, that will be the rare exception, probably only so they can dedicate resources to some other more important lawsuit.
- mrguyorama 2y agoAnd the point of the "maintain status quo" part is to ensure the pain comes slowly, over the course of a decade or so, as court cases make their way through the system, only taking tiny bites out of the regulatory framework at a time, to make it really hard to point out how much overturning Chevron has hurt regulation in the US