Posted on 03/17/2018 8:51:14 PM PDT by Voption
Without question, the most distinctive feature of the modern social democratic state is the rise of administrative agencies, which at the federal level function as a shadowy Fourth Branch of government that fits uneasily into our constitutional scheme of separation of powers, and which at the state level oversee vast swaths of economic activity...Defenders of the current administrative setup claim the elaborate procedural safeguards built into today's administrative law effectively blunt the risk of arbitrary power, whose exercise has always been in tension with the rule of law. In this talk, Professor Epstein will explain why he thinks the massive discretion routinely confided in administrative agencies is in fact inconsistent with the rule of law on a wide range of matters dealing with economic liberties, tort liability, private property, and the institutional autonomy of voluntary associations. (1:00:56)
(Excerpt) Read more at youtu.be ...
In a little over 2 weeks, the next FReepathon will begin.
We need to finish this one first.
Come on FReepers, let’s do this!!!
Death by a thousand departments.
Is Professor Epstein seriously libertarian, or recommending martial law, perhaps?
Not when the administrative state violates the Constitution.
When the administrative state violates the Constitution, it’s inconsistent with the rule of law.
For example, when the IRS targets citizens for political reasons.
Or when an outgoing White House occupant wiretaps the incoming president for political reasons.
Or, when the government spies on its citizens because it feels like doing it.
Lol was gonna post, I don’t need to watch a 1 hour video to know the answer. Congress should never have been allowed to abdicate their constitutional mandates to “agencies”, even if they have oversight. First, they actually didn’t give these power to subordinate agencies within their control they surrendered their Constitutional authority over to the Executive Cabinet. That tilts the balance of power of the 3 branches over to POTUS. Second, they allow these agencies to write their own laws - it doesn’t matter that they call them “regulations” it is a 4th amendment violation of due process. If Congress did not pass the regulation in a bill with POTUS signature it is not a law. Third, these agencies now routinely violate the 4th Amendment by entering private premises without a warrant in search for evidence of ‘violations’ for which they seek to fine and even jail their targets. We would not tolerate it if cops just kicked their way into random homes looking for evidence if wrongdoing. Why do we allow it in our businesses and industries, because they are more polite?
Many other reasons. Maybe I will watch the video because I dig this kind of debate.
Congress delegates authority then absolves itself of responsibility.
Indeed, watch it. Epstein is great. You may have to replay parts as he speaks very rapidly.
Administrative law and martial law do indeed share some common features. Both are unconstitutional. Administrative law could be thought of as a transition to martial law.
You really need to read Phillip Hambuger’s book. It explains that administrative law requires that ALJs follow the bureau’s policy over State or Federal statute and the constitution. ALJs that deviate can actually face denials of promotions and denials of salary increases for not doing so. Of course, there are no jury trials, hearsay evidence is permitted, and although there are are deadlines for scheduling hearings, there are no consequences for ALJs that delay hearings for years. They are also able to penalize defendants without any charges being brought which deprives the defendant of property and the ability to defend themselves.
James the first of England was a proponent of Adminitrative law becuse he wanted to avoid parlementary oversight and control. He created the dreaded Star Chamber. His son Charles continued the practice and was eventually dethroned and beheaded by parliament in the English Civil War.
BOY!
I didn’t see that coming!
What a plot twist!
LOL
Federal administrative agencies are Rule (law) makers, prosecutors and judges all at the same time. How could that be consistent with the rule of law?
I don’t need a law professor to tell me that.
What I need a law professor to tell me is why judges let these petty dictators get away with their unconstitutional usurpations of power 95% of the time.
Thank you, very much!
You don’t mention that the Federal government has no police powers outside of the district of Columbia.
Under our constitution a Federal warrant should be served by a State LEO. Even a Federal Marshal should be accompanied by a State LEO (Except in a Federal territory i.e. Puerto Rico)
The FBI is an extra-constitutional agency as is BATF, SS and any other agency that arrest State citizens under color of Federal Law outside of Washington DC.
If the Feds want to arrest someone they need a Sheriff or other state LEO to execute the arrest warrant.
Well, in an ideal world where our constitution was honored. But the US has been a post constitutional government since at least 1861.
The Administrative State has become the Law.
Epstein speaks in whole paragraphs. Not just when he’s lecturing, but even when he answers questions.
The guy is a brilliant classical liberal in the tradition of Locke and Jefferson and Mills. His weekly Hoover Institution podcast is must listening for me, even though he has been a never Trumper. He now acknowledges that he has to evaluate Trump a la carte: some things Trump says and does are good and others are bad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.