Reply to Bye-bye Chevron

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Bye-bye Chevron "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][img]https://i.imgur.com/584QRVw.jpeg[/img][/quote]

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.[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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.[/quote]

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.  [/quote]

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.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics