SCOTUS Looking at Violating Most Protocol And Destroying Everything Else?

[Jimmy Higgins]

link

SCOTUS is to hear arguments regarding a regulation put forth by the Obama Admin, paused by the Federal Courts, repealed by the Trump Admin, and abandoned by the Biden Admin. So... SCOTUS wants to rule on something that doesn't exist today. A particularly out of the normal way of action by this radical court. They want to cripple the Government or at least regulatory Government. Force you to have a baby yes, bribery is 'free speech', but whether that water is clean or not... that's dystopian!

In recent cases, the conservative court majority has begun to outline something it calls the "major questions doctrine," which could hamstring the authority of all agencies, from the EPA to the Securities and Exchange Commission to Federal Reserve Board.

In general, it is far less deferential to agencies than the court's previous case law suggested. Specifically, the major questions doctrine requires Congress to specifically authorize new policies or directions, even when the language of a statute gives an agency broad power. The question is, "has Congress spoken clearly enough to tell a federal agency that you can create a program that has substantial effects on the American economy," explains Tom Johnson, a lawyer who previously worked for West Virginia in its opposition to the Clean Power Plan.

...

But the major questions doctrine is not the only new twist that some of the court's conservatives have advocated. Another is something called the non-delegation doctrine. As some conservatives see things, Congress is quite limited in how much regulatory power it can give to agencies.

Jonathan Brightbill, an environmental lawyer who previously represented the Trump administration in the case, summarizes the outer edges of the nondelegation argument—namely that Congress cannot delegate unlimited power to executive agencies, no matter what the circumstances are. After all, he points out, "ours is a constitutional system," and the Constitution places legislative power in hands of representatives in Congress—not unelected executive agencies.

 

[Politesse]

It's so freaking bizarre. The conservatives spend decades bitching about "legislating from the bench", but the second they gain control of the Court, they make a blatant, undisguised power grab.


They're morons, though. They always forget that whatever powers they steal from the Congress now will still belong to the Court in the future, when it has a liberal majority again.

 

[Elixir]

They're morons, though. They always forget that whatever powers they steal from the Congress now will still belong to the Court in the future, when it has a liberal majority again.

I disagree. They're not morons, just shortsighted, greedy fucks. They're mostly old men who will be dead before the Court has a liberal majority. In the meanwhile, they're lining up at the trough and stuffing their faces. And now (since 1/6/21) they know that when the lib'ruls do take charge, they can simply resort to violence without any real repercussions.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It's so freaking bizarre. The conservatives spend decades bitching about "legislating from the bench", but the second they gain control of the Court, they make a blatant, undisguised power grab.


They're morons, though. They always forget that whatever powers they steal from the Congress now will still belong to the Court in the future, when it has a liberal majority again.

The trouble is presedence becomes void and then the courts no longer really have the centralized SCOTUS to oversee things.

 

[Rhea]

So they are willing to just destroy it. Short-sighted? Or just nihilistic?