Well now that basically any new regulation passed by congress has to go through judicial review, we will need even more of them, and the lawyers on the bench will have the final say. This is a coup by lawyers, not a blow against them.
What that actually means is that the rules will be written by Congressional staffers and if you think that the revolving door be elected politicians and industry is bad it pales into insignificance compared with the revolving door between industry, lobbyists and Congressional staffers. I guess without career civil servants in the way industries will be able to receive an even larger return on their campaign contributions (legalized bribery) than they do now.
SCOTUS upholds ban on homeless sleeping in public places (thank god) Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Sleeping Outdoors in Homelessness Case
Of course our new plan to house them is just to put them in jail, as they move from town to town, but hey at least they will be less visible right?
No it isn’t. It’s going to bring back the pre Chevron standard for judicial review, which was quite effective. I don’t represent big companies, I sue them and by virtue of regulatory capture, they use agencies to stifle competition. I once had a client who had small farm and sold rats to places like Busch Gardens to feed their snakes. A major competitor turned them in for having too many rats in one bin. The agency prosecuted my client for the inhumane treatment of rats and sought to close him down. Inhumane treatment of rats is not a law or written regulation.
Good thought. It would be fabulous if this decision could lead to IRS code simplification. I would even support a flat tax rate ( for everyone).
So you sue big companies on behalf of smaller companies to make regulations less effective? No wonder you love this ruling!
It wont lead to “simplification”, because one side of the isle isn’t about the IRS being able to do its job properly. They are there to undermine the IRS for the benefit of the donor class that funds their vacations. That’s it. That’s the only objective.
I've both defended and sued the government for overreach. (Mostly on the suing side.) The "cure" is not easy. Congress delegates gaps to the agencies to fill because it is ill-equipped to write all the rules. Nothing in our Constitution prevents Congress from doing that. And it is an efficient way to govern. Chevron was a rule of deference. It recognized that one elected branch empowered another elected branch to make certain decisions. So the unelected branch deferred to those decisions as long as they weren't clearly overreaching. If there is one constant we've seen from Roberts and the other Republicans in recent years, it is them creating law that awards themselves more and more power at the expense of the elected branches. We're in another Lochner era. I get you don't like homeless people, but criminalizing people's existence is repugnant. And there's a long history of vagrancy laws in this country that demonstrates how disgusting they are. They've historically been used to persecute "undesirables," including in the South to reimpose slavery on Black people after the Civil War. What other options do we have? Leave them alone? Provide them shelter? Use policy to try and address the underlying problems causing homelessness? Ha! This is America. We jail our way out of and then into problems. Doesn't the Animal Welfare Act apply to animal dealers? Rats are animals. So if the law applies to inhumane treatment of animals, it would apply to inhumane treatment of rats, right? Am I missing something? Did they use a different law?
Just the opposite! Those who support this decision hate America, the Gators, puppies and angels. I mean really? Do you really think that those whose opinion differs from yours on this ruling are fellow citizens who are against our country and our justice system? Is that the reasoning you follow with other issues? How does that help a discussion?
I guess in his world, we needed Congress to specify rats as an animal protected from cruel treatment, then define all possible cruel treatments commoditized rats could be subjected to, then specify what type of containers are allowed and how many rats are allowed per container. I’m sure the politicians will get right on that in between cocaine fueled orgies.
Good news for printers used by politicians doing stunts about how there are "8000 pages of this law" ... bad news for trees
Remember as the Republicans in robes are telling us that they should be the ones deciding these policy questions, not the experts at agencies, that this is pretty common for them to do: Supreme Court Corrects EPA Opinion After Gorsuch Confuses Laughing Gas With Air Pollutant
