Posted on 04/14/2023 5:32:13 PM PDT by piytar
The Supreme Court on Friday dealt the administrative state another blow with a 9-0 decision holding that individuals and businesses harpooned by an independent agency don’t have to suffer a torturous government adjudication to challenge its constitutionality in federal court (Axon Enterprise v. FTC and SEC v. Cochran).
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
It isn’t quite the victory it seems. Read the Gorsuch concurring opion where he writes that the majority got the right answer through the most muddled headed reasoning imaginable and they should have cut to the chase and recognized that a party alwasy has the right to seek judicial relief from the actions of the administrative state.
Not going to disagree.
Except a win is a win, even if it’s ugly.
They were probably struggling to preserve Frothingham v Melon (1923) which rejected the then long recognized right to pursue a private prosecution of a public right ... or in plain words demand the federal obey the Constitution.
The really ugly truth is not a single law passed since 1925 is actually law that is when the administrative state took over and agencies began ruling the American people.
Now do, Wikard v. Filburn, please!
I would go further to point out that as retaining our rightful common laws was given as one of THE reasons for becoming independent at all being placed under Administrative Law is a negation of the very purpose we exist as a nation of free States in the first place ... and not just a negation of the Law that permits the federal to exist.
The Constitution grants no power to fuss about things that merely affect commerce among the States, not even commerce within a State.
It wasn’t even meant to let the federal fuss about what private persons or privately held entities do should they engage in interstate commerce ... only to let the federal do something about a State interfering in interstate commerce to give its own Citizens a leg up over Citizens of other States.
Correct. Moreover, the fact that this was a 9-0 decision, with Justice Kagan writing the opinion, should tell us that there was rather much less here than meets the WSJ's eye. Inside baseball stuff. Of course Thunder Basin is a crap precedent, as Justice Gorsuch points out. It was authored by Harry Blackmun. What the hell else could it be? But how many Justices even signed on to Gorsuch's separate concurrence? Oh, right. None.
But the WSJ editorial page has long been one of the chief shills for the uniparty state, always eager to promote the narrative that things aren't as bad for the average person as we might think, that progress is being made, that things can, and will, get better ... if you just keep voting the right way, that is, keep throwing your support to the right kind of people. Look, when money is your true god, you're going to be pretty happy with the status quo. You just have to keep the rubes from wising up to the scam, that's all.
Good post.
And, with its powers of discretion, the administrative state is inherently arbitrary, another of THE reasons for becoming independent, as you say.
Bingo.
That’s when you know how egregious the prior state was
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.