Earlier quoted context omitted.
My experience is that people attack experts incessantly when it conflicts with their politics. (Think: Anti-vaxxers attacking the medical system). In my experience they may raise good points, but those are usually tangential to the matter at hand. WRT this specific expert group, is there something wrong with them? I haven't heard such but am willing to be educated. Disillusionment is easy when one accepts sweeping ge…
> WRT this specific expert group, is there something wrong with them? With Federalist Society judges? Oh my sweet summer child.
Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
41–50 of 64 posts
Re: Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
#42From TFA: In its complaint, Ryan LLC accused the FTC of overstepping its statutory authority in declaring all noncompetes unfair and anticompetitive. Judge Brown agreed, writing, "The FTC lacks substantive rulemaking authority with respect to unfair methods of competition." They're certainly not wasting any time; the bloody corpse of The Chevron Doctrine is still warm. This is the new reality. Every single decision,…
Looks like the FTC is not overstepping its bounds.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim...
Congress said unfair competition is outlawed. The FTC can determine what unfair competition means and enforce it.
Re: Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
#43Can we just dissolve the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas? They continually harm the entire country with their nonsense. Almost every “crazy” decision you’ve heard about in recent years comes from this one district.
Re: Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
FTC commissioners are appointed, and approved by the Senate, just like judges. The distinction you’re trying to draw doesn’t exist.
> The distinction does exist. We're just arguing about the metes and bounds of their legislatively-granted authority. I can't tell you don't agree about SCOTUS but I believe there were over 1,200 comments about that this week and there's no point in adding to it.
IIRC, that thread was about Trump v United States, (IANAL IMHO) pertaining to unitary executive theory.
Whereas I'm whinging about this court's multiple precedent smashing decisions attacking administrative law, (IANAL IMHO) pertaining to the judicial primacy.
Obviously, I do not think POTUS is the law, nor SCOTUS is outside the law. Stately plainly, I'm certain that > 70% of Americans would agree.
On my more practical terms, I can't abide the Robert's Court eschewing any legal theory. It decides cases peice meal. They selectively use Textualism, Originalism, Historicalism, Major Doctrines, Revanchism, or 4chan memes, to reach predetermined outcomes. With no regard for making each decision mesh with all the others. With no effort to provide guidance to the lower courts. Repeatedly contradicting themselves!
Resulting in chaos.
As we've seen with Dobbs (overturning Roe v Wade). And we'll now see with their push-pull wrt executive power (eg, On the one hand, POTUS' administrative state can't do anything, and on the other, POTUS can do anything as an "official act". OMG! Which izzit?! Make up your minds!)
It's one thing for me (or any one) to disagree with their decisions. That's totally normal. (In a civil society.)
It's another thing entirely when no one knows what the law is any more. This is new. This is not normal.
WTF do we even call this? Calvinball?
Re: Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
#45I don’t like noncompetes but I don’t like unelected officials making economy-wide decisions even more. Congress can do their job and pass laws. I’m tired of law making delegated to faceless bureaucrats.
why? the bureaucrats understand the domain and the context. have you seen the US Congress? this is just a way for the moneyed people and their lackies to gum up the works and make life worse for the majority while siphoning even more money to the moneyed.
Re: Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
#46The question before the Court in this case was whether the FTC has the power to issue substantive rules related to unfair methods of competition. The Court concludes[0] that the FTC does not have that power, and that Section 6(g) of the FTC Act permits the FTC only to issue "housekeeping" rules related to agency organization, procedure, or practice. That follows from three main statutory and historical clues: 1) Sect…
Thank you for a thoughtful summary of what really happened. So many people are focused on outcomes that they would destroy the plumbing of government to get where they want to be.
[flagged]
Re: Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
#47[flagged]
Re: Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
#48[flagged]
[flagged]
Re: Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
#49Pretty screwed up that a single judge can block an entire agency
Re: Federal judge partially blocks U.S. ban on noncompetes
#50I don’t like noncompetes but I don’t like unelected officials making economy-wide decisions even more. Congress can do their job and pass laws. I’m tired of law making delegated to faceless bureaucrats.
why? the bureaucrats understand the domain and the context. have you seen the US Congress? this is just a way for the moneyed people and their lackies to gum up the works and make life worse for the majority while siphoning even more money to the moneyed.
You have it exactly opposite - it is only the moneyed and well-connected who can get the regulators to make rules that fit their needs, while the small business has no hope.