Bye-bye Chevron

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

I take it you don't like the decision?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

Can you explain why Title IX seems to change with every new administration?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

How did it get tipped over?

Oh yeah, someone called bullsh*t.


"The heart of the Chevron decision says federal agencies should be allowed to fill in the details when laws aren’t crystal clear. Opponents of the decision argued that it gave power that should be wielded by judges to experts who work for the government.

The court ruled in cases brought by Atlantic herring fishermen in New Jersey and Rhode Island who challenged a fee requirement. Lower courts used the Chevron decision to uphold a 2020 National Marine Fisheries Service rule that herring fishermen pay for government-mandated observers who track their fish intake.

Conservative and business interests strongly backed the fishermen’s appeals, betting that a court that was remade during Republican Donald Trump’s presidency would strike another blow at the regulatory state."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/supreme-court-weakens-federal-regulators-overturning-decades-old-chevron-decision-in-victory-for-business-interests

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

Thank you for this cogent response. The Republican Party has become a real danger to our republic through ignorance and spite. Still it’s astonishing that SCOTUS has been so short-sighted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

Thank you for this cogent response. The Republican Party has become a real danger to our republic through ignorance and spite. Still it’s astonishing that SCOTUS has been so short-sighted.

Says another Washington DC bureaucrat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

Then why are you so upset about judicial review? If ever you say is true then Chevron was meaningless. But you can’t simultaneously act like everything was always above board and that somehow getting rid of Chevron is a big deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good bye abortion pills. A conservative's dream: Jesus, guns, babies, no regulations, no taxes. If only Trump has not won in 2016. Welcome to the nightmare.

Trump said last night he was fine with abortion pills.

But he will sign a law passed by a GOP congress banning them.

And then it will go underground. But then GOP not jobs will monitor pregnancies and if no baby in none months, the woman gets arrested. Enjoy your Christofascist nation.

See what happens when you piss down people's throats with agitprop?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

How did it get tipped over?

Oh yeah, someone called bullsh*t.


"The heart of the Chevron decision says federal agencies should be allowed to fill in the details when laws aren’t crystal clear. Opponents of the decision argued that it gave power that should be wielded by judges to experts who work for the government.

The court ruled in cases brought by Atlantic herring fishermen in New Jersey and Rhode Island who challenged a fee requirement. Lower courts used the Chevron decision to uphold a 2020 National Marine Fisheries Service rule that herring fishermen pay for government-mandated observers who track their fish intake.

Conservative and business interests strongly backed the fishermen’s appeals, betting that a court that was remade during Republican Donald Trump’s presidency would strike another blow at the regulatory state."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/supreme-court-weakens-federal-regulators-overturning-decades-old-chevron-decision-in-victory-for-business-interests

In other words Republicans made taxpayers bear the burden of the cost of oversight over the fisheries industry. That's typical of Republicans. They want industry to be able to reap all the profits but want taxpayers to pay the cost of doing business. Capitalist where it comes to corporate profits, socialist where it comes to corporate expenses. Wild.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

Then why are you so upset about judicial review? If ever you say is true then Chevron was meaningless. But you can’t simultaneously act like everything was always above board and that somehow getting rid of Chevron is a big deal.

What subject matter expertise does the court have in whatever the regulatory matter is? And how is a judicial review process happening in the course of a week or less adequately replace a process that previously took months of systematic review by subject matter experts, legal experts, policy experts, academia, industry and the public, along with rounds of review by both chambers of Congress and the GAO?

Again, gross ignorance is showing. It's a dishonest power grab and nothing more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

Then why are you so upset about judicial review? If ever you say is true then Chevron was meaningless. But you can’t simultaneously act like everything was always above board and that somehow getting rid of Chevron is a big deal.

What subject matter expertise does the court have in whatever the regulatory matter is? And how is a judicial review process happening in the course of a week or less adequately replace a process that previously took months of systematic review by subject matter experts, legal experts, policy experts, academia, industry and the public, along with rounds of review by both chambers of Congress and the GAO?

Again, gross ignorance is showing. It's a dishonest power grab and nothing more.

Where in the constitution does it say that courts must have subject matter expertise in a regulatory matter in order to review it? Does consent of the governed even matter to you at all? Or is it that your noble goals are more important than silly and annoying concepts like due process?

Judicial review takes much longer than week.

It isn’t a dishonest power grab. Maybe, maybe! Marbury v Madison was a dishonest power grab but that’s been settled law for over 200 years. The simple reality is this: the executive agency wanted to impose a bankrupting fee in the fisheries case when congress did not give them that authority. They wanted to expand the waters definition in the Idaho case. And Obama backdoored anti-coal policy via the clean power plan. And those are just recent high profile issues. All of those issues were highly controversial. None of those were clearly and explicitly legislated by congress. All SCOTUS said was that courts should no longer defer to the executive branch in these controversies and should instead approach these controversies via clean slate. All of you are freaking out because the serfs now have at least a pathway of fair review via the judicial branch. It is so disgusting that Americans—many working in the executive branch—are freaking out over the fact that the executive branch of government will no longer receive DEFERENCE in its controversies with the people. Oh, the horror.

Maybe some of us are too cavalier about this and showing gross ignorance about the chaos that will ensue. But you all sure are showing a nasty technocratic authoritarian streak that seems to suggest you can’t even stand the idea of people fighting for their rights in courts unless the deck is stacked in your favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

Then why are you so upset about judicial review? If ever you say is true then Chevron was meaningless. But you can’t simultaneously act like everything was always above board and that somehow getting rid of Chevron is a big deal.

What subject matter expertise does the court have in whatever the regulatory matter is? And how is a judicial review process happening in the course of a week or less adequately replace a process that previously took months of systematic review by subject matter experts, legal experts, policy experts, academia, industry and the public, along with rounds of review by both chambers of Congress and the GAO?

Again, gross ignorance is showing. It's a dishonest power grab and nothing more.

Where in the constitution does it say that courts must have subject matter expertise in a regulatory matter in order to review it? Does consent of the governed even matter to you at all? Or is it that your noble goals are more important than silly and annoying concepts like due process?

Judicial review takes much longer than week.

It isn’t a dishonest power grab. Maybe, maybe! Marbury v Madison was a dishonest power grab but that’s been settled law for over 200 years. The simple reality is this: the executive agency wanted to impose a bankrupting fee in the fisheries case when congress did not give them that authority. They wanted to expand the waters definition in the Idaho case. And Obama backdoored anti-coal policy via the clean power plan. And those are just recent high profile issues. All of those issues were highly controversial. None of those were clearly and explicitly legislated by congress. All SCOTUS said was that courts should no longer defer to the executive branch in these controversies and should instead approach these controversies via clean slate. All of you are freaking out because the serfs now have at least a pathway of fair review via the judicial branch. It is so disgusting that Americans—many working in the executive branch—are freaking out over the fact that the executive branch of government will no longer receive DEFERENCE in its controversies with the people. Oh, the horror.

Maybe some of us are too cavalier about this and showing gross ignorance about the chaos that will ensue. But you all sure are showing a nasty technocratic authoritarian streak that seems to suggest you can’t even stand the idea of people fighting for their rights in courts unless the deck is stacked in your favor.

This. I was literally told by a chief bureaucrat “you have no Constitutional rights as far as I am concerned” and have been waiting for this moment ever since. The rules apply to everyone. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

How did it get tipped over?

Oh yeah, someone called bullsh*t.


"The heart of the Chevron decision says federal agencies should be allowed to fill in the details when laws aren’t crystal clear. Opponents of the decision argued that it gave power that should be wielded by judges to experts who work for the government.

The court ruled in cases brought by Atlantic herring fishermen in New Jersey and Rhode Island who challenged a fee requirement. Lower courts used the Chevron decision to uphold a 2020 National Marine Fisheries Service rule that herring fishermen pay for government-mandated observers who track their fish intake.

Conservative and business interests strongly backed the fishermen’s appeals, betting that a court that was remade during Republican Donald Trump’s presidency would strike another blow at the regulatory state."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/supreme-court-weakens-federal-regulators-overturning-decades-old-chevron-decision-in-victory-for-business-interests

In other words Republicans made taxpayers bear the burden of the cost of oversight over the fisheries industry. That's typical of Republicans. They want industry to be able to reap all the profits but want taxpayers to pay the cost of doing business. Capitalist where it comes to corporate profits, socialist where it comes to corporate expenses. Wild.

At least understand the FACTS of the case.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fishermens-supreme-court-fight-government-monitors-make-big/story?id=102060183

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This kind of nonsense demonstrates a complete ignorance of how the regulatory process works. NO, agencies cannot just invent new laws out of thin air, and there IS oversight and accountability. Every regulation cites the enabling / authorizing statute for the rulemaking and every rulemaking goes through public comment, review and approval before it goes into effect. Proposed rulemaking is submitted to both houses of Congress as well as the Government Accountability Office for review and approval or overturn. Congress has oversight hearings on rulemaking. Congress has the power to modify or repeal regulations. That's all under the Congressional Review Act. The Administrative Procedure Act also gives industry, academia, stakeholders and the public opportunity to review and provide comment on proposed rules as well.

It is the height of dishonesty and ignorance that the Republicans have promoted this complete mythology of "unelected bureaucrats creating thin air with no oversight." That's always been a bald-faced lie. And now SCOTUS has seriously undermined the ability of Executive Branch agencies to function coherently along with burdening Congress and lower courts with all of this.

How did it get tipped over?

Oh yeah, someone called bullsh*t.


"The heart of the Chevron decision says federal agencies should be allowed to fill in the details when laws aren’t crystal clear. Opponents of the decision argued that it gave power that should be wielded by judges to experts who work for the government.

The court ruled in cases brought by Atlantic herring fishermen in New Jersey and Rhode Island who challenged a fee requirement. Lower courts used the Chevron decision to uphold a 2020 National Marine Fisheries Service rule that herring fishermen pay for government-mandated observers who track their fish intake.

Conservative and business interests strongly backed the fishermen’s appeals, betting that a court that was remade during Republican Donald Trump’s presidency would strike another blow at the regulatory state."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/supreme-court-weakens-federal-regulators-overturning-decades-old-chevron-decision-in-victory-for-business-interests

In other words Republicans made taxpayers bear the burden of the cost of oversight over the fisheries industry. That's typical of Republicans. They want industry to be able to reap all the profits but want taxpayers to pay the cost of doing business. Capitalist where it comes to corporate profits, socialist where it comes to corporate expenses. Wild.

At least understand the FACTS of the case.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fishermens-supreme-court-fight-government-monitors-make-big/story?id=102060183

These self appointed experts only care about their self serving outcomes, not facts, policy, due process, or separation of powers. How dare you ask them to meet standards, it’s their job to impose conditions, not live under them.