Live data from Hacker News

5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

ca5.uscourts.gov

151–160 of 191 posts

Re: 5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

#151
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's like arguing you shouldn't the read source for the software you use because you're not an expert.

It’s more like arguing you shouldn’t self diagnose your symptoms because you’re not a doctor. And also, someone who doesn’t know how to code isn’t going to be able to make sense of the source so that particular type of Dunning-Kruger problem is self correcting with programming in a way it’s not with law (or medicine).

>as someone who doesn't know how to code

You'll learn a lot by reading and it's probably easier to understand than you might think. If you don't do this other people take advantage of you. They do it a lot more than you would think.

Re: 5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

#152
post #117
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The gist of the decision is that the SEC’s imposition of civil penalties and disgorgement violated defendants’ seventh amendment right to a jury trial If being tried by a jury is so necessary for justice, how is it that ~95% of people currently imprisoned in this country have never faced a jury trial? The answer is obvious - actually having jury trials for everyone would grind the country to a halt, so for the majo…

I don’t like it either that the right to jury trial is overwhelmingly bargained away, but having the right and bargaining it away is still preferable to not have any right in the first place.

Yes, because this gives grounds for the argument that the system is broken (does not provide the right).

If > 90% of people are pressured into waiving the right, does the system actually provide this right?

Re: 5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

#153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how this doesn't end with the government basically failing. The modern world is dizzyingly complex, if Congress can't delegate to dedicated agencies how does this all work. Are there 435 people in this nation well versed enough to write detailed regulations on nitty gritty details about Securities on Monday, regulations on Agriculture on Tuesday, rules for calculating acceptable emissions for Coal Fired P…

There are only 15 cabinet secretaries, each if which heads an executive branch agency. If 15 such can manage and set priorities for such an agency, it should be much easier for 435 people to spread the load and oversee those agencies, including the relevant degree of delegation to agency or independent experts that might be appropriate to a particular issue

… those 15 cabinet secretaries employ more than 4 million people.

Re: 5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

#154
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It will be very interesting to see what happens if SCOTUS tries to roll back the administrative state... "Interesting" to say the least. Trying to govern a modern nation of 370 million people based on a literal 18th-century interpretation of a Constitution designed to govern a handful of former colonies is going to be a (very predictable) disaster, which is why the Court hasn't done it before.

This country became a world superpower with 100 million residents before it got any of the modern administrative state.

I think you've got things a bit off. I think more correct ones are:

- "This country became a world power with 76 million residents in 1900 before it got any of the Progressive era administrative state."

- "The country became a world superpower with 180 million residents in 1960 before it got the modern administrative state"

You wrote "world superpower", but the US didn't become a world superpower until WW2, well after ~1915, which is when the population reached 100M.

While the US started becoming a world power in 1898, with the Spanish-American War, and fully became a world power by WWI, that was after the Interstate Commerce Commission was formed in 1887, as the first administrative agency.

Now, you wrote "modern", which of course is in the eye of the beholder and likely is meant to exclude the ICC. Did the modern era start in 1906, with the FDA and the Federal Meat Inspection Act? Or Wilson, with the Federal Reserve (1913) and the FTC (1914)? Or the New Deal (1930s), like the SEC (1934)?

You'll note that all of those were before the US became a modern world superpower, and several before the US population reached 100M.

On the other hand, this beholder - https://ballotpedia.org/Administrative_state - points out that the modern administrative state didn't start until 1964 with Johnson's Great Society programs.

Here's another equally true statement:

- "The country became a world superpower with 203 million residents in 1970 before 18 year olds had the right to vote."

While true, that wouldn't justify removing the franchise from modern 18 year old.

Your observation, even when corrected, seems to be similarly weak as an argument to remove administrative agencies.

Re: 5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

#155
post #113
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah, can you imagine the horror of making the congressmen actually do their job and pass the laws, instead of delegating all their authority to unelected, nameless, and effectively unaccountable bureaucrats 1. Those bureaucrats are appointed by the President, whom you vote for, and by Congress, whom you vote for, and may be fired by the former. If you don't like what the executive branch of the government looks li…

> Those bureaucrats are appointed by the President, whom you vote for, and by Congress, whom you vote for, and may be fired by the former. I wish this was the case, but it is not: only a minuscule fraction of government bureaucrats is politically appointed. The people actually drafting the million pages of administrative regulations are overwhelmingly career bureaucrats, who are effectively unfireable. > 2. In 2022,…

> If the elected representative cannot get enough votes to pass a law, it most likely means that the law is not that important, or that there is no agreement on what it should be.

I'm not even in the US and i know that's quite simply untrue. Almost every single issue gets split among party lines, regardless of its merits. Abortions, vaccinations, climate change combatting are supported by the majority of the population, yet no law on either can really be passed due to arcane rules and the refusal of one party to do anything that might benefit the other ( which is more interested in appearing right and not rocking the boat than actually doing anything).

You people need a revolution ( of the head chopping kind, or at least prison/exile) and a complete overhaul of your broken political system. There's no excuse to stick with the first past the post system, gerrymandered districts, voter disenfranchisement, electoral college and the pure temerity around it ( a candidate gets 5k votes more than the other in a state? All electoral votes from that state go to them! ?????) besides the "sanctity" of the current status quo your current political establishment espouses.

Re: 5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

#156
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it s a great system because foundational change requires a super majority of consensus across multiple political lines. Not just a mob showing up with pitch forks demanding the flavor of the week.

Rule by the minority. You think that's fair?

Do you really want $other_party to be able to change the constitution whenever they happen to get a supermajority?

Re: 5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger ;

> in the time of war So are military courts going to close down since we’ve now ended the Afghanistan war? Or is that comma before “militia” going to mean that the time of war phrase is on for people who in a militia?

Pretty sure it just means you can’t summarily execute a subordinate during peacetime.

During wartime disobeying a direct order is a serious offense (probably one of the most ‘infamous’ of offenses) but during peacetime you get to have a trial and more than likely not be shot.

Re: 5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

#158
post #17

The gist of the decision is that the SEC’s imposition of civil penalties and disgorgement violated defendants’ seventh amendment right to a jury trial. Under the seventh amendment, you have a right to a jury trial for any claim that would have been an action at law in the courts of England at the time of the founding, prior to the merger of law and equity.[1] There is an additional principle that so called “public ri…

Can defendants in criminal or civil court request a verdict from a judge or panel of judges instead of a jury?

I believe Mario Batali did that quite recently in his alleged creepy touching trial.

Back to your explanation, this seems like a court functioning the way it was meant to. I think everyone will agree there was a massive Executive overreach in the 20th century, with congress abdicating much of its counterbalancing power (making difficult/unpopular policy decisions that are future-looking is not the recipe for re-election).

Bowing to precedence regardless of the quality of the decision seems like bad law facilitating more bad law.

Re: 5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

#159
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This country became a world superpower with 100 million residents before it got any of the modern administrative state.

I think you've got things a bit off. I think more correct ones are: - "This country became a world power with 76 million residents in 1900 before it got any of the Progressive era administrative state." - "The country became a world superpower with 180 million residents in 1960 before it got the modern administrative state" You wrote "world superpower", but the US didn't become a world superpower until WW2, well afte…

> Or Wilson, with the Federal Reserve (1913) […]

The Fed wasn't even the first US central bank. The Founding Fathers (e.g., Morris, Hamilton) created them very early on:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_central_banking_in_...

Re: 5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

#160
post #17

The gist of the decision is that the SEC’s imposition of civil penalties and disgorgement violated defendants’ seventh amendment right to a jury trial. Under the seventh amendment, you have a right to a jury trial for any claim that would have been an action at law in the courts of England at the time of the founding, prior to the merger of law and equity.[1] There is an additional principle that so called “public ri…

It will be very interesting to see what happens if SCOTUS tries to roll back the administrative state, because this is how Congress wants things to work. They passed all those laws to create the agencies, after all. And the expanding administrative state is what has allowed members of Congress to do less and less actual work, and more and more performance art and fundraising. They barely even have to pass budgets any…

> Also, personally it drives me crazy when American legal discussions fall back to English legal traditions. Didn’t we fight a big revolution so we wouldn’t have to live with all that baggage?

No, actually, the revolution mainly had the opposite intent: anger that England was denying the English colonists the rights they were entitled to as Englishmen and would have enjoyed in England.

Post reply on HN