PDF of the ruling: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf
As usual, it’s more nuanced than the headline.
Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
221–230 of 1001 posts
Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
#222Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
The senate is affirmative action for rural areas. Why do we accept minority rule?
Tyranny of the majority. New York City doesn't make rules for Eerie, Indiana. NYC can make rules for NYC.
NYC makes the rules for NY state. And the people of Buffalo, Plattsburg, etc, etc, aren't exactly happy with that or benefiting from that. They have more industrial economies than downstate does and they are kneecapped hard by some of downstate's economic policies.
States that are economically and politically dominated by a single economic zone are a great examples of why minority contingents need strong veto power.
Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
#224I don't ever want to hear the term "activist judges" or "legislating from the bench" from a conservative ever again. And, Barrett couldn't even cite the first amendment...
You appear to be under the impression that conservatives care about consistency or are vulnerable to accusations of inconsistency.
Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
#225So to recap: the SCOTUS has ruled that the agency established and authorized by Congress to regulate environmental protection does not have the authority to regulate environmental protection. Did I get that right?
I don't think so. Apparently, by my understanding, the issue in this decisions was not regulation of a particular coal plant's emmissions but of pushing utilities to add green capacity to offset GHG emmissions.
Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
#226Quoted post unavailable.
Fix the SCOTUS. I like the proposal to have term limits (long ones, maybe 20 years) and increase the number of justices so that every four years two of them are replaced by the sitting president.
Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't agree it will be chaos. Congress has for far too long abdicated what it is supposed to be directly responsible for to unelected bureaucrats that exist in agencies that are overseen by the executive branch of government. Congress is now free to focused on creating chaos between the people that elect them. When is the last time you've seen anyone from Congress campaign on any substantive issue? I've not seen it…
Quoted post unavailable.
Over 60% of the US population think abortion should be legal.
More than half of US states are (or are very likely) to institute abortion bans.
To the broader point, there has to be _representative_ democracy for decentralized decision making to be fair
- https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2021/nov/...
Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
#228I feel like a lot of people here would do well to try and understand the role of the Supreme Court, instead of treating it like a second version of Congress.
on the other hand, there have been confrontations with the judicial branch Supreme Court and others in the past, just not seriously in living memory. I was surprised to find in Wikipedia a discussion of changing the number of judges in the pre-WWII era also ("court packing").
Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
We managed for hundreds of years.
Mitch McConnell broke the Senate, and through that, the Judiciary.
Yes and the recent stuff with the wife of a SCOTUS justice involved in conspiracy to overturn an election is definitely a sign of hyper partisanship.
Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions
#230I really don't understand the decision. In my mental model the executive branch exists to implement the laws that Congress passes, Congress deliberately leaves leeway in laws to give the executive branch flexibility, this flexibility has been previously affirmed by the court decision Chevron v. NRDC. This decision seems to give more power to Congress but on net I think it makes the laws Congress passes weaker because…
Congress won't act, the Executive isn't permitted to do much even with what they were given by Congress, and the People are powerless to do anything unless 100% of them vote, which never happens, and even then may be overruled in many places.
No future for any of us I guess.