Posted on 11/25/2019 2:29:17 PM PST by bitt
The DACA cases squarely present the question of whether Congress delegated the authority to resolve such a major question about immigration policy
This morning, Justice Kavanaugh issued a statement respecting the denial of cert in Paul v. United States. He praised Justice Gorsuch's "scholarly analysis of the Constitution's nondelegation doctrine" from Gundy. Kavanaugh observed that the nondelegation doctrine "may warrant further consideration in future cases."
Kavanaugh carefully and concisely describes the relationship between the nondelegation doctrine and the major questions doctrine. He writes:
"JUSTICE GORSUCH's opinion built on views expressed by then-Justice Rehnquist some 40 years ago in Industrial Union Dept., AFL–CIO v. American Petroleum Institute, 448 U. S. 607, 685–686 (1980) (Rehnquist, J., concurring in judgment). In that case, Justice Rehnquist opined that major national policy decisions must be made by Congress and the President in the legislative process, not delegated by Congress to the Executive Branch.
In the wake of Justice Rehnquist's opinion, the Court has not adopted a nondelegation principle for major questions."
In Gridlock, I explained that the major question doctrine is something of an offshoot of the nondelegation doctrine. The Court need not revisit Schechter Poultry altogether. Rather, the Court's post-New Deal jurisprudence simply does not apply to so-called major questions. Kavanaugh explains:
But the Court has applied a closely related statutory interpretation doctrine: In order for an executive or independent agency to exercise regulatory authority over a major policy question of great economic and political importance, Congress must either: (i) expressly and specifically decide the major policy question itself and delegate to the agency the authority to regulate and enforce; or (ii) expressly and specifically delegate to the agency the authority both to decide e.g., Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA,..
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
p
it must be good because slate say ‘Brett Kavanaugh Is Ready to Join the Supreme Court’s Conservatives to Tear Down Key Federal Regulations’..
Obama had no authority to start DACA (even if he was a legitimate President, which he wasn’t)
As they transitioned from triple to quadruple negatives in legal speak, I got lost.
I presume this is good, but its all legal speak, so if someone can translate to English please, thanks.
“”””””I presume this is good, but its all legal speak, so if someone can translate to English please, thanks.””””
Translate to ENGLISH??????
I want it translated to uneducated deplorable so I can understand it.
Broad, and reasonable.
Would be more helpful to expound on the specific “delegation” method Obama used- which was ‘prosecutorial discretion’.
If I remember correctly.
In simple terms it means that congress can not delegate it authority.
This has far reaching implications in so many areas. Obviously DACA but also starting military conflicts overseas and even the delegation of money creation. Congress has the sole authority on both issues. It would be interesting to see a challenge to the federal reserve.
I echo your problem with the legal speak. Please, someone help!
Thanks for that.
SCOTUS decided to let a lower court’s ruling against the Constitutionality of DACA stand without review. So Obama’s DACA Executive Order will be deemed Unconstitutional in that Circuit, and other Circuits will probably rule the same, if any cases contesting the same issue come before them.
Obama had the power to grant reprieves, individually.
Obama is out of power. No more reprieves need be granted.
Trump can’t decide to not enforce the income tax until January 20th, 2025 by creating a Deferred Action for Tax Deadbeats (DATD) program.
Trump can’t block federal income taxation indefinitely by creating a DATD program.
The compromised John Roberts selling out in 3, 2, 1.
Translation:
Lack of pushback on Obalabingbong’s illegal order is not to be interpreted as abandoning Constitutional responsibilities.of Congress to the White Hut.
In other words, Congress needed to make a law and they didn’t do that because Pubbies controlled the Chambers.
Then Trump happened.
Conclusion:
DACA is dead, done, buried, gone, out of here!
it must be good because slate say ‘Brett Kavanaugh Is Ready to Join the Supreme Court’s Conservatives to Tear Down Key Federal Regulations’..
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I think you’re right on that
Seems as if allowing a federal agency to decide whether or not a specific gas that alone among all others in the earth’s atmosphere supplies all of the carbon molecules assembled in countless divinely elegant forms to define the familiar physical structure of every root, trunk, branch, leaf, vine, shoot, nut, seed, fruit, vegetable and tuber should nevertheless be classified as a pollutant would probably qualify as a bridge too far under this SCOTUS jurisprudence. Congress should never have sat still while the Executive Branch chewed on that question for as long as it did (only to decide every animal with lungs or gills pollutes every time it exhales).
ping
Maybe best to translate to español.
Like everything else is, these days.
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.