Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine • Hacker News Board

Re: Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

#51

Post by maxwell » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 2:55 PM UTC

spanktheuser wrote: post #38

neaden wrote: post #3

This court continues to make decisions that might be defensible if you were making them for the first time, but go against decades of precedent in which time many laws have been written on the assumption that things would work a certain way. For a group that claims to be holding to tradition they sure are willing to throw things into chaos.

Long term, I wonder if this destroys the Supreme Court. I see no reason why a future liberal majority would feel bound by any conservative precedent in the future. Replace respect for precedent with whatever position wins a majority and the incentive to pack the court seems irresistible.

Seems like we're evolving from common to civil law, probably for the better in the long run.

Re: Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

#52

Post by Drakim » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 2:55 PM UTC

brodouevencode wrote: post #34

neaden wrote: post #3

This court continues to make decisions that might be defensible if you were making them for the first time, but go against decades of precedent in which time many laws have been written on the assumption that things would work a certain way. For a group that claims to be holding to tradition they sure are willing to throw things into chaos.

So if something that is seen as a bad idea should be kept in place because "that's the way we've always done it"?

Obviously an outright bad idea should not be kept around just because that's how we have always done it, but don't underestimate the value of predictability and stability. Society can't operates if laws change every day, even if it's driven by a desire to make the laws better.

Re: Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

#53

Post by psunavy03 » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 2:55 PM UTC

jason2323 wrote: post #2

What is the significance of this

If a Federal law telling you what you can and can't do with widgets was ambiguous, then courts were previously required to defer to the Federal Widget Agency's interpretation of the law as long as the judge found the interpretation "reasonable."

Now, if there is a lawsuit or other legal matter over widget usage, the court can take the Federal Widget Agency's interpretation of the law into consideration, but is free to rule however it sees fit on the precise interpretation of Federal widget law.

Re: Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

#54

Post by pininja » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 2:56 PM UTC

I was curious about cases where this played a role. Looks like the namesake case was about EPA Clean Air Act enforcement in the 80s (the outcome being regulation), and then an FCC ruling to classify internet providers as “information services” rather than “telecommunication services” and avoid stricter regulation (the outcome being deregulation).

Overall, it seems the Chevron deference was a cornerstone of administrative law, affecting how agencies operate, how laws are enforced, and how the balance of power between branches of government was maintained. It’s not clear that this always led to more or less regulation. I’m curious what the impact of deference was beyond cases that made it to court?

Re: Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

#55

Post by iaw » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 2:56 PM UTC

brodouevencode wrote: post #34

neaden wrote: post #3

This court continues to make decisions that might be defensible if you were making them for the first time, but go against decades of precedent in which time many laws have been written on the assumption that things would work a certain way. For a group that claims to be holding to tradition they sure are willing to throw things into chaos.

So if something that is seen as a bad idea should be kept in place because "that's the way we've always done it"?

[flagged]

Re: Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

#56

Post by delecti » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 2:56 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #39

neaden wrote: post #3

This court continues to make decisions that might be defensible if you were making them for the first time, but go against decades of precedent in which time many laws have been written on the assumption that things would work a certain way. For a group that claims to be holding to tradition they sure are willing to throw things into chaos.

That is a feature, not a bug. Supreme Court decisions are informed by precedent, not bound by precedent. If that creates chaos it's not their fault. Blame the legislators who wrote bad or vague laws in the first place. If the laws were sufficiently clear and specific then the Supreme Court wouldn't have much work to do. And let's not have any ridiculous claims that the Supreme Court needs to legislate from the bench…

The US is a common-law country. By stare decisis, the courts are indeed supposed to be bound by precedent.

Re: Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

#57

Post by Molitor5901 » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 2:57 PM UTC

It Congress wants to change the law, they can. It's up to congress, not the administration, to make law. For decades it seems Congress has largely abdicated its legislative responsibility in exchange for the political ease of letting the administrative state, and the courts, make the law.

Just because something has "precedence" doesn't mean it's right. Banning gay marriage had precedence, but that didn't make it right. Slavery, segregation, all had ample precedence. They were still absolutely wrong then as they are now.

Re: Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

#58

Post by rootusrootus » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 2:57 PM UTC

mywittyname wrote: post #31

raytopia wrote: post #13

How much is this going to mess up the ability for the federal government to operate?

The hope from conservatives seems to be 100%.

There must be a great deal of tension within the right. On the one hand, some undoubtedly consider themselves small government libertarian types, but the recently ascendent MAGA folks are decidedly authoritarian and absolutely willing to use the federal government as a weapon against their perceived enemies. This sort of ruling helps the former but not the latter.

Re: Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

#59

Post by redeux » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 2:57 PM UTC

mywittyname wrote: post #19

FDAiscooked wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FDA finds food factory to be non compliant with food safety standards. FDA can't shut down the factory. It has to take it to court. A Judge with a JD or a jury of random people will decide if the factory can stay open. Factory stays open. Millions of people eat salmonella contaminated food.

I'm guessing the next stage is to prevent people from being able to sue said factories?

Yes, or absent that just limit the liability to a trivial amount, which many state governments have already been doing for years.

Re: Supreme Court overturns 40-year-old "Chevron deference" doctrine

#60

Post by hobs » Fri, Jun 28, 2024, 2:57 PM UTC

epicureanideal wrote: post #12

badrequest wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations will run roughshod over regulators and everyday citizens' lives will be measurably worse as a consequence.

Not at all. They can still be sued, and lawmakers can still make laws. (edited, originally mistakenly wrote "regulators" can still make laws, which is exactly the wrong thing)

Damn yeah lawsuits are really a quick and useful remedy to these problems, as long as you are willing to wait a decade or more for the resolution.