They say that like it's bad thing.
“I think that word they keep using does not mean what they think it means?” - Inigo Montoya
Has anyone seen an analysis of how this might effect the BATF? Or the IRS?
Props to Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson who voted to overturn. I hope the NYTimes gives her some credit. Thanks, Joe!
Oh no, the Permanent Imperial Bureaucracy might get its wings clipped a little.
The fascism runs deep at The NY Times.
Next, the Supreme Court needs to invalidate ambiguous statutes.
What it really does is gives power back to those venues where you can get a hearing, the courts who answer to the law and the principles of justice and due process and the legislature which, so the fiction currently goes, answers to the people.
This is a stake through the heart of the progressive agenda which has sought to use unchecked administrative power to advance their favorite causes, you know, like eliminating gas stoves and making waterfront property unuseable for any economic purpose.
once upon a time, this would have been a major impediment to government operations...
Not today...
Our Communist rulers will skillfully circumvent, negate, or ignore this SCOTUS action just as it has for years...
And that limit our freedoms!
“Justice Kagan summarized her dissent from the bench, a rare move and a sign of profound disagreement. “Courts, in particular this court, will now play a commanding role” in setting national policy, she said.”
No, bitch, that will be CONGRESS. The courts will ONLY interpret whether the agencies are following the laws that Congress wrote.
Several years ago, a congressman asked the DOJ for a list of regulations...regulations, not laws, at all government levels that require a prison sentence for violation. The DOJ responded that there were thousands and no way to collate or count them.
In Florida, there are ludicrous fines and prison terms for disturbing or handling certain wildlife, for catching too many or too small of various fish and burning trash. None of these went through the legislature. I’d like to see all of these gone. If the legislature wants to mandate a law, and get it signed, then fine. Do it. But don’t allow some dweeb who never leaves his desk to bankrupt of put people in prison because he has a hard on about the endangered pup-fish.
Imperiling! Oh noes. How about removing unlawfully applied rules and regulations put in place at someone’s whim?
When I heard the news I did my happy dance.
This is one of the best things to happen to our republic in years. What wonderful news.
First mortal blow to the deep state in ages.
For far too long, Congress has been content to pass laws totally without regard to how they ultimately would be enforced. Perhaps the Congress will, in the future, actually debate the full ramifications of a law before passing it. If they do not do so (and I doubt they will), the interpretations of regulations will be determined by whatever court litigants are able to shop their cases to!
“In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan said the ruling amounted to a judicial power grab.”
LOL. The judiciary “grabbed” the power assigned to the judiciary by the constitution — to interpret the law.
I would be better viewed as the Supreme Court saying the lower courts can no longer be lazy. They actually have to interpret the law.
What will happen though is the same thing as has happened on the second amendment. There will be a wholesale insurrection by lower courts against the Supreme Court on this one.
The lower courts filled with Obama and Biden Judges will just ignore the Supreme Court and force the Supreme Court to keep reversing case after case. And the Supreme Court does not have the time to do that.
The crux of the problem the justices met was ambiguity in some laws that passed law making power to the administrative state.
Before Chevron (1984) that legal ambiguity in the laws was settled in the courts. After Chevron that ambiguity was left to the administrative state agencies to decide about for themselves. After the recent ruling Chevron has been trimmed but not totally eliminated.
Courts can now question whether an agency is making its own interpretaion of a regulation, which the current ruling now disallows, but agencies are left to their own opinion of the facts the regulation is concerned with, as long as it is not also their own interpretation of some legal ambiguity in the law.
The entire framework of the administrative state invokes a progressive idea - “rule by the experts - that is irrational and illogical. It pretends that “official experts” have been miraculously handed powers of descernment so superior to any person or person, that there can be no expert opinion that disagrees with them - merely because they are the “official” opinion. We saw greatly during Covid the whole fallacy of that concept.
So why do the “progressives” love the current framework of the administrative state? Because they really do not trust real democracy - no guarantee of the results. The adoption of the administrative state was to intentionally avoid actual and specific Congressional decision making on specific items of “regulation”, and instead remove Congress from most of the power in that and let executive fiat by the apoointed “experts” make more and more and more and more of the decisions.
The progresive love of the adminstrative state dovetails neatly with the socialist impulse, which seeks to leave nothing to the Liberty of the people and all actions and behaviors dictated by the behemoth that the administrative state already is and will in time grow even more to be.
>> judicial hubris
lol, and judicial hyperbole, and judicial pretense, and quite possibly judicial pride especially during the month of June
“Elena Kagan said the ruling amounted to a judicial power grab. “
What a stupid woman. Giving lawmaking power to elected lawmakers is not a “judicial power grab.” Those three Marxists have a neck and neck race to be the most insulting and stupid on the court.
All the centralized feral government “agencies” are unconstitutional and should be dismantled immediately and the overpaid affirmative action employees forced to find real jobs.