Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

The REINS Act would define a "major rule" as any federal rule or regulation that may result in: an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, government industries, government agencies, or geographic regions; or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
1 posted on 07/04/2023 5:59:41 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Oldeconomybuyer

Has the Supreme Court ever taken a look at the constitutionality of FISA?


2 posted on 07/04/2023 6:02:02 AM PDT by hardspunned (Former DC GOP globalist stooge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Do Wickkard v. Filbourne.


3 posted on 07/04/2023 6:25:38 AM PDT by cowboyusa (YESHUA IS KING OF AMERICA! AMERICA FIRST! DEATH TO MARXISM AND GLOBALISM! there is no coexistence wi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

>>the ability of the federal government to function effectively is at stake.

They say that as if it’s a bad thing...


4 posted on 07/04/2023 6:30:39 AM PDT by vikingd00d (chown -R us ~you/base)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Kill the beast by requiring direct taxes, wages, etc, (except income) to be apportioned. The court ruled in Glenshaw glass that income is actually all appurtenances to wealth as opposed to the original meaning as a derivation (calculation on principal) from a source. That means increases in nominal value from outside like inflation are taxed.


9 posted on 07/04/2023 7:15:05 AM PDT by kvanbrunt2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Courts should simply not admit the regulatory texts into evidence.

If the Congressional act is too vague, strike it down.

Modern word processing software makes it very easy for governments to write laws.


12 posted on 07/04/2023 7:25:09 AM PDT by Brian Griffin (ARTICLE I SECTION 2....The President...may require the opinion, in writing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

What they’re going to get rid of is “Chevron Defense”. In 1984 Scotus issued a ruling that basically said where the law is ambiguous the federal courts would defer to the administrative agencies interpretations of the law. This was an enormous grant of power to executive branch agencies. SCOTUS will almost certainly roll back that huge grant of power to the agencies.

All the things Lefties are whining about the court doing now is simply overturning a lot of decisions the leftist Supreme Court made from about 1965-1985.


18 posted on 07/04/2023 10:35:30 AM PDT by FLT-bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

The Chevron deference is destined to ashheap of history. Vote will be 6-3, maybe 7-2.


19 posted on 07/04/2023 11:16:13 AM PDT by WASCWatch ( WASC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

The Fed agencies are an entire 777 airliner full of 500 lb passengers.


21 posted on 07/04/2023 11:53:07 AM PDT by lurk (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson