Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

Mm-hmm. And climate change is just a greenie issue, not an issue that we are all dealing with already, today. Gotcha.

He typed this as his AC is working to the point of imploding. But it's all fine.

Oh my, without the bureaucrats, we’d all be dead! They do everything for everyone all the time! How dare we impose checks and balances on them.

It will be fun when the judge in Texas will say the NIH cannot use stem cells for research to cure your cancer. Eff them bureaucrats!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

Mm-hmm. And climate change is just a greenie issue, not an issue that we are all dealing with already, today. Gotcha.

He typed this as his AC is working to the point of imploding. But it's all fine.

Oh my, without the bureaucrats, we’d all be dead! They do everything for everyone all the time! How dare we impose checks and balances on them.

It will be fun when the judge in Texas will say the NIH cannot use stem cells for research to cure your cancer. Eff them bureaucrats!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

Mm-hmm. And climate change is just a greenie issue, not an issue that we are all dealing with already, today. Gotcha.

He typed this as his AC is working to the point of imploding. But it's all fine.

Oh my, without the bureaucrats, we’d all be dead! They do everything for everyone all the time! How dare we impose checks and balances on them.

It will be fun when the judge in Texas will say the NIH cannot use stem cells for research to cure your cancer. Eff them bureaucrats!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

Mm-hmm. And climate change is just a greenie issue, not an issue that we are all dealing with already, today. Gotcha.

He typed this as his AC is working to the point of imploding. But it's all fine.

I think an office of unelected nanny-state administrative-busy-bodies just got told to stand down and not to turn their feel-good opinions into legislation.

Many office dwellers in DC may lose their funding. The horror.

Who have the gumption to think their “ends” justify their “means” regardless of the Constitutional order.

Not to worry, they will throw the Constitution in your face when it comes to banning abortion tho

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

I know! Lead water is AWESOME!

Where did they say that?

That's what SCOTUS is gonna say when those pesky safe water regulations get to them.

Go back to sleep.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

Mm-hmm. And climate change is just a greenie issue, not an issue that we are all dealing with already, today. Gotcha.

He typed this as his AC is working to the point of imploding. But it's all fine.

I think an office of unelected nanny-state administrative-busy-bodies just got told to stand down and not to turn their feel-good opinions into legislation.

Many office dwellers in DC may lose their funding. The horror.

Who have the gumption to think their “ends” justify their “means” regardless of the Constitutional order.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

Mm-hmm. And climate change is just a greenie issue, not an issue that we are all dealing with already, today. Gotcha.

He typed this as his AC is working to the point of imploding. But it's all fine.

Oh my, without the bureaucrats, we’d all be dead! They do everything for everyone all the time! How dare we impose checks and balances on them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

Mm-hmm. And climate change is just a greenie issue, not an issue that we are all dealing with already, today. Gotcha.

He typed this as his AC is working to the point of imploding. But it's all fine.

I think an office of unelected nanny-state administrative-busy-bodies just got told to stand down and not to turn their feel-good opinions into legislation.

Many office dwellers in DC may lose their funding. The horror.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

I know! Lead water is AWESOME!

Where did they say that?

That's what SCOTUS is gonna say when those pesky safe water regulations get to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

Mm-hmm. And climate change is just a greenie issue, not an issue that we are all dealing with already, today. Gotcha.

He typed this as his AC is working to the point of imploding. But it's all fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

Mm-hmm. And climate change is just a greenie issue, not an issue that we are all dealing with already, today. Gotcha.

He typed this as his AC is working to the point of imploding. But it's all fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.

Mm-hmm. And climate change is just a greenie issue, not an issue that we are all dealing with already, today. Gotcha.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real. The FDA is funded and controlled by Big Pharma. Big AG controls the department of agriculture. And the SEC is run by a bunch of ex bankers.

So please stop acting like these bureaucrats are independent.

What the court did is say if something is to be controlled and regulated, congress should pass legislation that does so. And that the courts will determine whether someone is adhering to the laws as set by congress.

We live in a representative republic. Thinking unelected bureaucrats (many of which are owned by the very ppl they are meant to regulate) should make laws and regulations governing US citizens. Is supremely undemocratic

This was the best SC decision I have seen in decades.

Agreed. I miss Ohio rivers catching fire and Thalidomide babies. Make America Great!

Americans will have no protection against pollution and toxins. Doing away with the Chevron deference standard will harm Americans so that the wealthiest can become wealthier.

Nah. The answer has always been and will always be make Congress do more and be better. Anything else is anti-Constitutional and at odds with our form of government. Those who think bureaucrats are the answer hate the American way of life. Turf defending bureaucrats are as problematic as corporate lobbyists but they are way less scrutinized. Allowing them to inbed on Committees on the Hill is a terrible practice. I can remember when John Dingle almost killed an Exec Branch Agency staffer who came up onto his dias to try to influence an outcome. That is how it should be. The reg state has been a boon to law firms and consultants and the twits about this town but it’s hurt us in countless other ways.

Its to make Congress invest in the talent, technology and take accountability. Write a stupid law and the press should dig in and cover it. Idiot Members who turn money back in to be “frugal” should be fired. Congress needs to massively up its game, period.

Otherwise, we can can the Constitution.

Wilson was wrong about everything from his racism to his views against representative government. This all goes back to his bad ideas. Good riddance.

The irony in all this is that Chevron deference was created by the Republican Supreme Court who - at the time - were concerned about lower-court liberal judges implementing their own reading of ambiguous statutes. So the conservatives on the court created the Chevron deference in order to constrain liberal judges and empower the executive branch agencies (at the time controlled by the Reagan administration).

And of course who can forget Justice Scalia’s love of Chevron!
https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=dlj&te=1&nl=the-morning&emc=edit_nn_20240118

The trashing of Chevron is just the elite clique of Republican/FedSoc lawyers moving the goal posts to advantage themselves once again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Stevens, Burger, Brennan, Blackmun, White, and Powell doesn’t quite sound like an army of Conservative jurists to me.

3 justices appointed by Nixon + 1 appointed by Ford were not “conservative”? Weird take, bro.

DP probably was not aware that before the current illegitimate SCOTUS, justices actually made decisions based on the law, not what their bribers tell them.

I think it’s just a glaring example of how far “conservative” ideology has veered so far to the right relative to the 1970s and 80s. They think the Nixon appointed SC are apostates for the Chevron decision.

The ahistorical ideological incoherence is amazing.

Why?

They're putting the unelected administrative bureaucratic state in check.

I personally LOVE IT. The nonsense is out of hand.

The EPA declaring carbon dioxide is a "pollutant"? Yeah, whatever.