Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 1001 posts

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

#191

Post by saint_fiasco »

GenerWork wrote: post #153
Spivak wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but people who have been listening have also been dreading this coming for years. The fact that they're consistently knocking over shelves doesn't make it better. We've known that Roe was on the chopping block, but it doesn't make it good law even if it's consistent with the conservative justices' goals.

>Yes but people who have been listening have also been dreading this coming for years. Why are they dreading this? I find it strange how so many people are upset that the Supreme Court is forcing Congress to do its job, which is pass laws.

> forcing Congress to do its job

> Why are they dreading this?

You answered your own question there. Congress should do its job, but as a matter of fact it is not doing its job and it is not going to do its job anytime soon.

The Court might be technically, legally, philosophically correct in removing the inelegant hacks that the previous courts set up to route around the fact that Congress does not do its job. But in the meantime, Congress is still not doing its job.

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

#192

Post by psunavy03 »

mikeyouse wrote: post #121
lolinder wrote: post #104

There's a tendency among certain people on HN to act like the conservative justices have no rhyme or reason and are just a bull running mindlessly through the china shop breaking precedent at random or specifically to hurt specific groups of people. I'm not a fan of every ruling that they've made, but this should have come as absolutely no surprise to anyone who's been paying any attention to the arguments that this…

Nobody doubted this is where it would end up - but it's a terrible place at complete odds with judicial restraint and precedent. The courts are going to be the de facto regulatory body in the US going forward, a responsibility they granted themselves out of thin air.

They didn't grant it out of thin air. Go re-read Article III of the Constitution.

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

#193

Post by radley »

stronglikedan wrote: post #137
callroomlamp wrote: post #118

Devastating that expertise will no longer influence the application of law and policy. The biggest question is who will interpret the application of law? Will it be challenged in court once again until a clear statement is made? Meanwhile, what will be the effects of this “deregulation” until a clear statement is made

It's not about the application of law. It's about the ambiguity of law. If anything, they'll need to rely on more expertise now, so they can craft laws that aren't open to interpretation. This is a fantastic decision on the part of the court.

> It's about the ambiguity of law. If anything, they'll need to rely on more expertise now, so they can craft laws that aren't open to interpretation.

I doubt that granting Congress more power will inspire them to be less political, more responsible, and more governed by facts. Particularly when the party that made this decision has veered completely in the opposite direction.

If anything, it will be used to prioritize "faith" over fact, like what we've seen in Oklahoma and Mississippi.

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

#194

Post by impalallama »

stronglikedan wrote: post #137
callroomlamp wrote: post #118

Devastating that expertise will no longer influence the application of law and policy. The biggest question is who will interpret the application of law? Will it be challenged in court once again until a clear statement is made? Meanwhile, what will be the effects of this “deregulation” until a clear statement is made

It's not about the application of law. It's about the ambiguity of law. If anything, they'll need to rely on more expertise now, so they can craft laws that aren't open to interpretation. This is a fantastic decision on the part of the court.

Ambiguity is built in the very nature of language. Good luck writing anything doesn't have some ambiguity built in...

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

#195

Post by Simplicitas »

lolinder wrote: post #104

There's a tendency among certain people on HN to act like the conservative justices have no rhyme or reason and are just a bull running mindlessly through the china shop breaking precedent at random or specifically to hurt specific groups of people. I'm not a fan of every ruling that they've made, but this should have come as absolutely no surprise to anyone who's been paying any attention to the arguments that this…

In an ideal world, maybe. In the US, where business mostly already owns government, this decision will further erode the little control citizens have over them.

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

#196

Post by rayiner »

callroomlamp wrote: post #118

Devastating that expertise will no longer influence the application of law and policy. The biggest question is who will interpret the application of law? Will it be challenged in court once again until a clear statement is made? Meanwhile, what will be the effects of this “deregulation” until a clear statement is made

Untrue. The way it will work now is that judges will focus on their expertise—interpreting what the laws mean. And agency experts will focus on their expertise—applying that law to specific factual scenarios.

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

#197

Post by eyelidlessness »

lolinder wrote: post #104

There's a tendency among certain people on HN to act like the conservative justices have no rhyme or reason and are just a bull running mindlessly through the china shop breaking precedent at random or specifically to hurt specific groups of people. I'm not a fan of every ruling that they've made, but this should have come as absolutely no surprise to anyone who's been paying any attention to the arguments that this…

There’s also a tendency, among those persuaded by particular philosophies of governance, to ignore decades of electoral strategy which has married control over the courts with political priorities where these harms are exactly the desired outcomes. There’s probably a case to be made that the model of governance and the specific political harms are more intrinsically linked than mere strategy. But putting that aside… conservatives writ large are all too eager to abandon that model of governance when it doesn’t have the desired political effect. And it’s easy enough to imagine the conservative movement losing love for even this highly favorable court if certain high profile cases don’t go the way they expect.

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

#198

Post by rayiner »

radley wrote: post #193
stronglikedan wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about the application of law. It's about the ambiguity of law. If anything, they'll need to rely on more expertise now, so they can craft laws that aren't open to interpretation. This is a fantastic decision on the part of the court.

> It's about the ambiguity of law. If anything, they'll need to rely on more expertise now, so they can craft laws that aren't open to interpretation. I doubt that granting Congress more power will inspire them to be less political, more responsible, and more governed by facts. Particularly when the party that made this decision has veered completely in the opposite direction. If anything, it will be used to prioriti…

If that party can win elections by doing that, that’s what should happen. “Expertise” carries zero weight in a democracy other than its ability to persuade voters.

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

#199

Post by rootusrootus »

gradus_ad wrote: post #83

The basic trend in America has been to defer power to an administrative state beholden to the Executive. This accumulation of power has the basic effect of enabling tyranny. To prevent tyranny it is necessary to check this concerning accumulation of Executive power.

Does this decision do that, or does it just move the accumulation of power to a different branch? From bureaucrats who can be fired to unelected judges with lifetime tenure. How would you argue that this is an improvement?

The response may be that Congress makes far more specific legislation, along with all the weird pitfalls that will come from that, and outsources the actual text to corporate lobbyists. That seems like a win only if you implicitly trust that corporations are working in our best interests. Is that a core plank in the conservative platform?

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

#200

Post by throwup238 »

GenerWork wrote: post #153
Spivak wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but people who have been listening have also been dreading this coming for years. The fact that they're consistently knocking over shelves doesn't make it better. We've known that Roe was on the chopping block, but it doesn't make it good law even if it's consistent with the conservative justices' goals.

>Yes but people who have been listening have also been dreading this coming for years. Why are they dreading this? I find it strange how so many people are upset that the Supreme Court is forcing Congress to do its job, which is pass laws.

That's a nice catch 22 they've got there. Congress has been passing laws for decades under the assumption that the Chevron case is settled precedent. Now they're getting rid of it because... Congress needed to instead pass laws completely ignoring the courts ruling?
Post reply on HN