"SCOTUS should put the Chevron Doctrine on the ash heap of history"
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (Non-FR)
Regarding so-called Supreme Court doctrine tests, what the post-FDR era Supreme Court is wrongly neglecting to do with respect to cases testing the federal government's constitutionally limited powers is to first check if there's a constitutional clause that reasonably justifies a federal law or regulation in the first place.
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
In fact, what we're seeing with respect to the misguided Supreme Court was warned about as early as 1803.
"If it were, in fact, an unconstitutional exercise of power in congress to pass a law establishing the bank, nothing can manifest the impropriety of over-stepping the limits of the constitution, more than the act which we have just noticed. It shows that the most unauthorized acts of government may be drawn into prescedents to justify other unwarrantable usurpations [emphasis added]." —Article 1, Section 8, Clause 6, St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries 1:App. 262--64, 1803.
The problem imo is that institutionally indoctrinated judges are still getting the wires crossed between the federal government's constitutionally limited powers and common law imo.
In fact, the Constitution's 1st numbered clause, Article I, Section 1, evidently a good place to hide that clause from Supreme Court justices, makes it clear that ALL federal legislative / regulatory powers are vested in the popularly elected Congress, not constitutionally undefined, so-called "federal regulatory agencies" run by non-elected bureaucrats.
"Article I, Section 1: All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives [and IRS and EPA, etc.]."
Consider that post-17th Amendment ratification lawmakers discovered that by establishing constitutionally undefined federal regulatory agencies run by non-popularly elected bureaucrats that they could avoid taking responsibility for the legislative powers that voters trusted them with.
In other words, constitutionally undefined federal regulatory agencies wrongly helped to foster the emergence of career lawmakers imo.
This is especially a problem when Congress lets federal bureaucrats get away with stealing state powers to do Congress's dirty legislative work for them.
The biggest problem with state and federal regulatory agencies is that they weaken the constitutionally enumerated voting power of ordinary qualified citizen voters imo.
The bottom line is that all Democratic and Republican patriots who support Trump need to "reset" the unconstitutionally big state and federal governments by primarying ALL incumbent state and federal government leaders in 2024 elections since they have all shown that they're not willing to stand up to condemn unconstitutional government policies imo.
In fact, while I support Trump, regular readers of Free Republic can probably do a better job of endorsing MAGA candidates for office than Trump can.
The definition of insanity is reelecting your beloved, state and federal career lawmakers and executives over and over again, expecting different results every time.
Thanks for that reply. That covered the situation very well.