Chevron deference overturned by scotus

[AzIron]

It's not political at its core

At its core it's been precedent that a regulatory agency that has the power to Levi fines and write the rules as the administration of that agency wants done is to not be questioned and is for your own good. This means the core issue is were is the accountability and to whom is it. The politics come from jack wagons trying to tell normal folks that they have the solution and if we give them the power they will fix it and the guy with the other point of view is wrong and should be discredited because the first guy is smarter by his own definition


I don't care what side of the isle your beliefs are on the regulations put in place. Accountability doesn't hurt anything to do with the regulations or the need for them just the expedience of how they got there

 

[AzIron]

The follow up questions I have is based on what is rumored to be changing on new emission laws and weather those bench marks are attainable what kind of cost are being forced onto the average everyday person because the cost has to be passed on and if the new regulations are going to require an even stricter tolerance for engineering and operating conditions then the failure rate of emissions control devices will increase

My question is at what point does the regulation cause more of the overall impact it's trying to mitigate

 

[CM1995]

The follow up questions I have is based on what is rumored to be changing on new emission laws and weather those bench marks are attainable what kind of cost are being forced onto the average everyday person because the cost has to be passed on and if the new regulations are going to require an even stricter tolerance for engineering and operating conditions then the failure rate of emissions control devices will increase

My question is at what point does the regulation cause more of the overall impact it's trying to mitigate

That was one of my first thoughts as well. What's going to happen to the new emissions standards coming down the pipeline? How are they going to be affected? Or are they going to be affected?

All I know is I would like the $8K+ I spent on failed DEF sensors on our 325FL back.

 

[AzIron]

That was one of my first thoughts as well. What's going to happen to the new emissions standards coming down the pipeline? How are they going to be affected? Or are they going to be affected?

All I know is I would like the $8K+ I spent on failed DEF sensors on our 325FL back.

I want the carbon foot print back from failed emissions devices

 

[Truck Shop]

The politics come from jack wagons trying to tell normal folks that they have the solution and if we give them the power they will fix it and the guy with the other point of view is wrong and should be discredited because the first guy is smarter by his own definition

That's been going on since Archimedes invented the death ray.

 

[Acoals]

Sure it may clog up Congress with a bunch of decisions

Good, they will have something constructive to do for awhile . . .

 

[cfherrman]

That was one of my first thoughts as well. What's going to happen to the new emissions standards coming down the pipeline? How are they going to be affected? Or are they going to be affected?

All I know is I would like the $8K+ I spent on failed DEF sensors on our 325FL back.

Someone just needs to sue the EPA saying their regs don't conform to the statues.

I saw a tic Tok a guy said he lost his job at Tyson as he made sure they were complying with the FDA and he blamed the scotus, yeah right man, I'm sick of people making this political.

 

[willie59]

Someone just needs to sue the EPA saying their regs don't conform to the statues.

After this ruling I'm sure the lawsuits will come, but it will require someone with standing, someone who can prove they have been injured by given alphabet agency rulings in order for a lawsuit to continue in court.

 

[cfherrman]

That's not going to be very hard, several people I'm this thread already does.

 

[Birken Vogt]

It's going to be painful and expensive for the alphabet agencies to comply, but not like they did not do painful and expensive things to everyone else for the last 50 years.

 

[zhkent]

I agree the CWA and it's enforcement got out of hand, with hard working people suffering the consequences. IE regulatory overreach. I don't think the chevron ruling was the answer.
This following is just a thought about the chevron ruling and the FDA

I remember studies and adds paid for by tobacco companies that claimed cigarettes didn't cause cancer. Eventually that was debunked, but it took years because of the revenue the cigarettes generated.
Smoking in the USA is about 1/2 less from 1965 to 2016 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigarette) of what it used to be. From the same article some parts of the world have seen a 1/3 increase since 2000.
Have all the advertising restrictions and other regulations regarding selling or promoting cigarettes been written into law or has congress gave the FDA that authority?
With the new ruling would the regulations for cigarettes have to be written into law?
How about all the food and label regulations?
To me the fox is conglomerates that will do what makes them the most money, regardless of health, safety, or environmental cost and they are being released.

 

[aighead]

This feels like a taxation without representation issue also, going back to AzIron says up top.

It also feels like it'll depend entirely on who our representatives are, and whether they can overturn the overturn, or just decide to vote with whatever the 3 letters want. More lobbying? Is it called lobbying when it's a gov't organization or just money laundering and buying influence?

Suing people/organizations seems like the way America puts its foot down, for better or worse, but it seems to work. Suing these joints out of business seems cool in a lot of respects. I could see the FDA/CDC being sued out of existence (or at least back to what they should be doing) over some mandates and lockdowns of late.

 

[funwithfuel]

This feels like a taxation without representation issue also, going back to AzIron says up top.

It also feels like it'll depend entirely on who our representatives are, and whether they can overturn the overturn, or just decide to vote with whatever the 3 letters want. More lobbying? Is it called lobbying when it's a gov't organization or just money laundering and buying influence?

Suing people/organizations seems like the way America puts its foot down, for better or worse, but it seems to work. Suing these joints out of business seems cool in a lot of respects. I could see the FDA/CDC being sued out of existence (or at least back to what they should be doing) over some mandates and lockdowns of late.

How could you sue an entity out of existence that has unlimited resources. You, me and the other guy, we all have finite income available to us, be it savings or investments. Those assets would be liquidated in short order trying to knock the gov't entity down a peg, let alone the idea of taking it out of the equation. Gun rights groups have been trying to abolish the ATF&E for decades for their murderous overreach. They look at it as a "hold my beer" moment.
We're Stuck with what we got, the best we can hope for is reform. Congress can't pass meaningful legislation unless it's somehow culturally or ethnically driven. There is no common sense up there, save for a few.

 

[AzIron]

The over reach gets out of control because the lobbyists go to regulatory agency's and get rules put in that would never pass congress and that is the ball game there because that's not a representation style of gov

So basically main street usa doesn't have access to influence regulation that is run by unelected officials like special interest does because there is no accountability and it takes resources to get ideas through the door of an agency so only we'll funded special interest gets things done

Now if we think putting this back to congress will somehow make gov over reach and unintended consequences stop or that anything is actually going to get done that's probably wishful thinking there is a reason a group of representatives is called a congress cause it's a house of monkeys

 

[Acoals]

I saw a tic Tok a guy said he lost his job at Tyson as he made sure they were complying with the FDA and he blamed the scotus

Maybe now would be an excellent time for this guy to learn some skill that is actually useful and could generate an income without being propped up the government . . .

 

[Truck Shop]

The irony of these decisions regarding the chevron decision is over the top.

 

[ianjoub]

I see it as congress had abdicated its duty. Their job is to create law. They chose, instead, to create legal framework and let bureaucrats fill in the blanks. Which is, defacto law creation and a direct violation of the Constitution.

If congress can not be bothered to create specific and complete laws, it couldn't have been that important in the first place.



"
3. Nondelegation. Article I, Section 1 vests all legislative powers in Congress, which means the President and the Supreme Court cannot assert legislative authority. See Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952). This marks an important separation of powers between the departments of the federal government. It also has been interpreted to include a principle of nondelegation, that the people’s representatives in Congress must make the law, rather than delegate that power to the executive or judicial branch.

For most of American history, judges and commentators have assumed that Congress cannot “delegate” legislative authority and the Supreme Court has located this rule in Article I, Section 1. See, e.g., Whitman v. American Trucking Associations, Inc. (2001). Individual Justices have opined that the nondelegation doctrine ought to be treated as a serious limitation on Congress’s authority. (For example, see Justice Thomas’s dissent in Whitman.)"

 

[Tones]

For those outside of the US this may put a handle on the topic.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1807513128479150478

 

[MarcusZ1967]

For those outside of the US this may put a handle on the topic.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1807513128479150478

For those that don't twit.....

For those who don't understand what Chevron Deference is, and why SCOTUS ended it, here's the long and short of it: A family fishing company, Loper Bright Enterprises, was being driven out of business, because they couldn't afford the $700 per day they were being charged by the National Marine Fisheries Service to monitor their company.

The thing is, federal law doesn't authorize NMFS to charge businesses for this. They just decided to start doing it in 2013. Why did they think they could away with just charging people without any legal authorization?

Because in 1984, in the Chevron decision, the Supreme Court decided that regulatory agencies were the "experts" in their field, and the courts should just defer to their "interpretation" of the law.

So for the past 40 years, federal agencies have been able to "interpret" laws to mean whatever they want, and the courts had to just go with it.

It was called Chevron Deference, and it put bureaucrats in charge of the country.

It's how the OHSA was able to decide that everyone who worked for a large company had to get the jab, or be fired.

No law gave them that authority, they just made it up.

It's how the ATF was able to decide a piece of plastic was a "machine gun".

It's how the NCRS was able to decide that a small puddle was a "protected wetlands".

It's how out-of-control agencies have been able to create rules out of thin air, and force you to comply, and the courts had to simply defer to them, because they were the "experts".

Imagine if your local police could just arrest you, for any reason, and no judge or jury was allowed to determine if you'd actually committed a crime or not.
Just off to jail you go.

That's what Chevron Deference was. It was not only blatantly unconstitutional, it caused immeasurable harm to everyone. Thankfully, it's now gone. We haven't even begun to feel the effects of this decision in the courts. It will be used, for years to come, to roll back federal agencies, and we'll all be better of for it. And that's why politicians and corporate media are freaking out about it.

 

[funwithfuel]

x.com

x.com

I saw this and had to share. It's a little long but seems about right.