Chevron Deference

[3 Pete]

The Supreme Court heard 3 hours of oral arguments on this yesterday. Chevron Deference is a 1984 SC decision that inadvertently set today’s administrative state into motion. Fast forward to 2024 and we’re being governed by federal agencies. With the right Supreme Court ruling, that could change.

 

[OriginalGatorHator]

The Supreme Court heard 3 hours of oral arguments on this yesterday. Chevron Deference is a 1984 SC decision that inadvertently set today’s administrative state into motion. Fast forward to 2024 and we’re being governed by federal agencies. With the right Supreme Court ruling, that could change.

We got to hope Clarence tears it to shreds.

 

[Dawgdocindosta]

In general, it needs to be overturned. Unfortunately, the spirit of the original ruling made a lot of sense. But the problem is the ruling was used for political gain instead of common sense interpretation. It's really proof that the government can screw up anything.
JC

 

[MRDAWG]

Who is going to regulate whether new prescriptions get approved? caveat emptor?

 

[Zonadog]

Certainly, we are supposed to have 3 branches of the federal government, not 4.

Not sure what we can reasonably expect from this ruling, but they aren't going to wave a wand and dissolve all federal agencies.

What I'd like to see is more accountability to Congress. That includes staying to the stated purpose of the agency and stay out of politics. Government agencies shouldn't be a mechanism to create legislation. That's the job of Congress. I don't know how you do that with a court ruling.

 

[Pecanman]

The ruling has been twisted by many government agencies to put onerous burdens on everyday hard working Americans in several types of industries. From what I've read, it appears the only way to fix the original ruling is to throw it out completely, effectively nudering the government's power over private businesses ability to operate day to day.

 

[OriginalGatorHator]

The ruling has been twisted by many government agencies to put onerous burdens on everyday hard working Americans in several types of industries. From what I've read, it appears the only way to fix the original ruling is to throw it out completely, effectively nudering the government's power over private businesses ability to operate day to day.

The problem with the Chevron ruling was it allowed the Government to create extra judicial tribunals that had original jurisdiction over every case that arose from federal regulation. And the courts essentially washed their hands of it and said “no appeal”.

Think about how screwed up that is, beaurucrats create regulations, they prosecute under this regulations, and then they get to judge themselves on whether or not they were right in bringing prosecution.

Don’t get me wrong my sympathy for most corporations is zero but it was a massive expansion of government power with zero checks to it and it needs to be done away with.

 

[Zonadog]

The problem with the Chevron ruling was it allowed the Government to create extra judicial tribunals that had original jurisdiction over every case that arose from federal regulation. And the courts essentially washed their hands of it and said “no appeal”.

Think about how screwed up that is, beaurucrats create regulations, they prosecute under this regulations, and then they get to judge themselves on whether or not they were right in bringing prosecution.

Don’t get me wrong my sympathy for most corporations is zero but it was a massive expansion of government power with zero checks to it and it needs to be done away with.

And replaced with what? Otherwise, there is no framework to limit or control the power of bureaucratic agencies.

 

[OriginalGatorHator]

And replaced with what? Otherwise, there is no framework to limit or control the power of bureaucratic agencies.

There already isn't any limit to their power.

Doing away with Chevron gets rid of the presumption that the bureaucratic tribunals made the correct decisions in the first place.

Doing away with all the agencies is better or taking away their judiciary powers.

Frankly the agencies aren't even needed.

 

[Pecanman]

The government agencies are the judge, jury, & executioner the way it is set up in the present. That is the best way I know how to phrase it .

 

[atlanta cock#]

Who is going to regulate whether new prescriptions get approved? caveat emptor?

Have you seen how many RX commercials there are now? Maybe it’s time to scale back.

 

[Dirty Hairy Dawg]

Who is going to regulate whether new prescriptions get approved? caveat emptor?

Partially caveat emptor, partially civil liability and also accurate reporting of the stats, pros and cons, by the fed agencies and amplified by the media. Obviously, you can point to holes in this type of system but I can point to holes in a system that prohibits new promising drugs that may be effective in other countries being prohibited by fed regs here.