• Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    3 days ago

    Doesn’t the Chevron ruling doom basically any standard originating from the executive? It’s almost impossible to talk about planned regulations after the Supreme Court seized that power.

    • IHeartBadCode@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yeah with Chevron gone this is fluff talk at this point. Nothing can be regulated without the Courts giving it an okay or Congress explicitly allowing it verbatim. The Loper Bright case paired with Relentless, Inc. has basically nullified novel regulatory authority without the Courts consenting.

      The framers anticipated that courts would often confront statutory ambiguities and expected that courts would resolve them by exercising independent legal judgment

      — Chief Justice Roberts (Loper Bright Enterprises, et al, v. Raimondo)

      Additionally, Robert’s indicated that the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 has always provided Judicial review of every regulation and that everything since that point must now be reviewed by the Courts.

      Biden is indicating that he’s going to produce a heat standard via OSHA which was formed in 1971, so OSHA’s ability to even make that standard and potentially their full authority is under question now. OSHA isn’t going to be doing jack crap for easily the next twenty years for the Courts to fully review their broad authority, unless SCOTUS overturns this judgement. For all we know, SCOTUS might hold OSHA to follow the exact letter of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 which would neuter them in a heartbeat. Luckily things like the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 which prohibits child labor in particular kinds of jobs will fall outside of that review and OSHA will still be able to enforce that kind of stuff since it’s explicit that OSHA enforces any labor law prior to the 1970 act.

      There is literally nothing any President going forward can promise without Congress completely having the President’s back or the Justices agreeing with the President. Basically, without at least 2 out of 3 branches agreeing, literal nothing will happen. This is literally the setup nobody will enjoy and will cripple Federal Government for the foreseeable future without those rare instances where Congress and the President are of the same political party.

      • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        There is literally nothing any President going forward can promise without Congress completely having the President’s back or the Justices agreeing with the President.

        This was always true. The Affordable Care Act was met with repeated judicial challenges and survived thanks to judicial interpretation.

        Regulatory rules have alsp always been subject to judicial review, especially after the public comment period. If an agency does not respond to comments, a rule can be struck down as arbitrary.

        The difference now is that the courts can evaluate rules not based on scientific and administrative expertise but on ideology whether they adhere to the legal authority Congress granted them. Chevron deference implied that Congress gave agencies the legal authority to adapt to new situations. The misanthropes of the Supreme Court disagree because, for them, the Constitution is a dead document allowing adaptation to anything at all.