Posted on 10/30/2021 7:54:06 AM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear a challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate power plant emissions, in a case that legal scholars say could undermine Congress’s constitutional authority to delegate power to federal agencies. Some argue that such regulation — not just by the EPA, but in President Biden’s vaccine mandate as well — is unconstitutional because of a somewhat arcane legal doctrine called the “nondelegation doctrine.” This theory holds that Congress cannot delegate broad policymaking authority to government agencies.
Why does this argument matter? Our research finds that if the Supreme Court were to invalidate either the EPA’s authority or the vaccine mandate under this doctrine, it might unravel nearly every major law Congress has passed since World War II. Nearly every one of these laws involves delegating authority to U.S. agencies.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Most likely the court took the case to cement the doctrine. Then it will be “settled law”.
There aren’t enough slaughterhouses in the world to butcher that many sacred cows. ‘Twould be nice, though.
—> Paving the way for Devolution, as described quite eloquently and thoroughly by Kash Patel. Devolution Part 1 - How did we get here?
++1
Perhaps, but 1977 was not that long ago so it really isn't settled law. I have my hopes up that Barrett will make all the haters here eat crow. Very little of what is said here about her is based on reality.
I'm pretty familiar with Article I.
Perhaps these "legal scholars" could point me to where Congress has the power to delegate its exclusive powers which arise from the fact that they are elected and are subject to removal through election, neither of which apply to "federal agencies".
Yeah, we’ll be in the clear real soon. 😨😕. Individual’s right of self determination? Count on ‘scotus’ to uphold that. NOT.
Too good to be true, but it is true.
We don’t need a congress anymore. Congress doesn’t even produce a budget anymore, it’s main job under the Constitution. Congress has meaningless hearings, sets up money trains and royal-style travel for its members, talks a lot and that’s about it.
“..in a case that legal scholars say could undermine Congress’s constitutional authority to delegate power to federal agencies..”
Prejudiced much here?? (It’s the WaPo, so of course there’s prejudice).
The case is to decide if Congress has the constitutional authority in the first place. It’s not up to the Post or the rest of the press to say whether something is constitutional. The WaPo assumes it’s constitutional and any decision otherwise is undermining the Constitution.
We can only pray and hope.
“ I don’t care how he does it whether via the Court or another rebellion of Patriots, but one way or the other tearing down the unconstitutional part of the feds and rebuilding our Free Constitutional Republic MUST HAPPEN for our restoration and MAGA.”
_____________
All of my family are on board with this statement. All God asks of us is to put on His armor and show up to the fight.
The media lying again. Regulations are not laws. No bill went through Congress to be signed by a president to implement them. They are edicts. Royal decrees by unelected bureaucrats…
Piffle...
Won’t happen.
Even if they did, the decision would be ignored. Check out “legislative veto,” declared unconstitutional (1983).
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
Since this was among the reasons listed for separation and very much describes the bureaucratic mess we find ourselves in today it shows that the spirit of the Constitution has been severely broken.
I have been saying this for years..
Congress does this so that they don’t have to work real hard and can attend their parties..
Also they have plausible deniability about rules and regulations.
Petty beurocrats should not be able to pass “regulations” that can cost a person freedom or treasure.
That job falls upon Congress. They cannot be held responsible for rules made up by others.
Ruling against the unelected making, for lack of a better word, laws, would go a long way towards restoring our Republic.
At the same time it would strike a major blow against the deep state.
Where do I sign?
Dear God,
Let it be so!
SCOTUS could have chosen to ignore taking up the case; that they have decided to hear it should at least bring us some happy optimism.
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.