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

451–460 of 1001 posts

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

#451

Post by stvswn »

yongjik wrote: post #396
bell-cot wrote: post #93

Before proclaiming that this outcome is horrible - Please consider that the Good Guys (your opinion) might not win the election in November. And that you might not want the courts auto-deferring to all the plausible-ish interpretations of ambiguous laws which gov't agency officials appointed by the Bad Guys (your opinion) might suddenly add the Official Agency Interpretations next year.

Err, we've seen what happened when the Bad Guys (TM) won the election. They pack the Supreme Court with their friendly Bad Guys (TM) so that the Court can make decisions in their favor. (If you object, feel free to switch Good/Bad guys, and it will be still true.) So "Please consider that supreme courts may also limit the power of the Bad Guys" is clearly false, because when the Team X has power, they will make sure…

Simply because you're not a fan of the outcomes doesn't mean that the appointments of justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett were illegitimate. Chevron deference started under the Stevens court and the deference it entailed related to the Reagan administration. That this has become a conservative hobby horse since then has nothing to do with policy preferences that only cut one way in a partisan way, and has everything to do with a deeper disagreement over the separation of powers and the role of the judiciary. Chevron deference isn't "the system" it's simply one precedent that has been faltering for years. There's no reason for any "side" to see this as the sky falling unless you really, really want to preserve some federal regulation that is TOO IMPORTANT to allow statutes to clarify.

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

#452

Post by hindsightbias »

rswail wrote: post #99

I'm impressed that they can so easily dispose of 40 years of law making by Congress that assumed that agencies would interpret the statutes and make rules for regulating their area of authority. Now Congress is going to have to specify every possible consequence of laws in the statutes, otherwise a judge will decide. So agencies will not have any power to actually regulate. Awesome logic work, but terrible legal thin…

> easily dispose of 40 years

As I tried to explain to people in 2016, your kids are going to be living with the consequences of your vote for generations. We are in a new era of judicial supremacy and they are out of bubble gum.

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

#453

Post by rty32 »

jliptzin wrote: post #394
epoxia wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For context. Roberts, Alito, and Thomas; who are still on the court were dissenting opinions on the gay marriage decision. Seeming to favor "precedence" when it's convenient.

They start with the ruling they want, and then work backwards to find the most reasonable path to get there.

Well, for me I already knew this ruling months back. There is no surprise here.

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

#455

Post by EricDeb »

persnicker wrote: post #134

This is a fantastic outcome. If you give an agency the power to interpret the law that congress has prescribed to the agency, the agency will almost always chose an interpretation that is in their self-interest - often leading to a corrupt (really, just an outright wrong) interpretation of the law. It's surprising that Chevron was ever even case law. Thank goodness we have a set of justices that are actually looking…

I strongly disagree. As someone above said it's the equivalent of requiring a meeting for every commit when building software. How good do you think congress will be at passing small laws when changes need to be made in federal agencies regulations?

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

#456

Post by refurb »

sattoshi wrote: post #434
immibis wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It won't force Congress to do shit. The same flip flop will still happen, but instead of 4-year executive terms, it will be driven by lifetime court appointments. The court is going to remain Republican for the foreseeable future, unlike the presidency.

Whats the problem? If congress disagrees with what the courts did to fill in the blanks in their laws, they just need to pass new laws.

Indeed.

It seems like people don't understand how the system works.

Congress cries about Roe vs. Wade, but the power is entirely in their hands to pass federal law to secure abortion rights.

It's like the police crying that someone should do something about crime.

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

#457

Post by consumer451 »

beaeglebeachedd wrote: post #447
itsdavesanders wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And imagine how our allies feel. If you can’t count on the U.S. for more than about 3 years at a time, then you quickly move away from them and insure you aren’t so tied to them that a foreign election suddenly makes you vulnerable. Which then makes everyone weaker as a whole and easier to pick off. Which is why U.S. foreign adversaries have been actively sowing chaos for a decade.

[flagged]

The biggest beneficiary of Pax Americana is the United States, the second biggest is the entire world.

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

#458

Post by MR4D »

Congress can’t write good laws (good = clean, unambiguous) due to a variety of reasons, most of which are just political and not practical reasons.

Here’s hoping this decision causes Congress to write laws with more clarity now that they cannot be as sloppy and get away with it.

There may be much upheaval in the short term, but for that reason alone, I think it will have a positive impact on the country.

One other reason I think this decision is good - if we are innocent until proven guilty, then ambiguities should go in favor of the individual not the State.

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

#459

Post by oldpersonintx »

vkou wrote: post #391
brettcvz wrote: post #71

This seems like the judicial branch just voted to give itself substantially more power. Are there any checks against this? Or can justices just keep granting themselves more powers and invalidating any restraints?

> Are there any checks against this? Yes, packing the court.

[dead]

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

#460

Post by dilawar »

Xeoncross wrote: post #307
brettcvz wrote: post #71

This seems like the judicial branch just voted to give itself substantially more power. Are there any checks against this? Or can justices just keep granting themselves more powers and invalidating any restraints?

If you ignore the labels here, it's a small group of lawyers giving themselves more power because the large group of politicians can't get their act together and pass well-reasoned and descriptive laws. So the large body isn't functioning well and the small body doesn't trust it anymore. So if we make the small body (the supreme court) large like the large body (congress) will that actually fix the issue? Isn't the i…

>Personally, I would trust the nations top lawyers more than most of the congress members we have. However, it doesn't take much imagination to see the new issues that could arise)

Good luck with this.

At least these corrupt politicians come to face the music every four years.

Post reply on HN