Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions • Hacker News Board

Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

#241

Post by vwcx » Thu, Jun 30, 2022, 3:29 PM UTC

yieldcrv wrote: post #193

seoaeu wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Protester: "6 unelected officials can't decide what I can do!" > Supreme Court: "That's literally what we just said!" Bullshit. The court was perfectly happy telling millions of people they had no right to an abortion. They’re just a bunch of partisan hacks

that is a very popular perspective, which reinforces exactly what I said about it being too complicated for people. Congress outsourced the decision to the judicial branch, the judicial branch said its for the elected representatives, aka Congress, to decide. Barring any supremacy from Congress, state laws and the consensus mechanisms of those states are the only laws available. Congress outsourced emissions decision…

Good point. It's interesting to think about this outsourcing as a relief valve Congress uses. Feels like a function of the monetary stakes for any decision are too high. Even freshmen congressional reps are too soaked in the financial implications of their own function that they punt their appointed power to the judicial branch.

Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

#242

Post by davidw » Thu, Jun 30, 2022, 3:29 PM UTC

zionic wrote: post #232

davidw wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm old enough to remember when I could grudgingly accept that there was some wisdom in decisions I disagreed with, even if perhaps not enough to sway me. But I could see something argued intelligently. This is just nakedly partisan stuff going on. I think viewing it through that lens - "we're going to do what we want because it fits our politics" - makes the most sense.

> This is just nakedly partisan stuff going on. The problem is much of the left’s gains over the last few decades have been based on shaky legal/constitutional ground. Even leftist judges like Ginsberg admitted that, and they were counting on the mistakes being in place for too long to correct (precedent). Now all that technical debt is coming back to kick our ass. This isn’t the end of the world though, Congress can…

> This isn’t the end of the world though, Congress can fix everything that’s happened in the last few weeks via proper laws.

Proper laws are no match for calvinball rulings.

Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

#243

Post by scotty79 » Thu, Jun 30, 2022, 3:29 PM UTC

ericmay wrote: post #27

itslennysfault wrote: post #7

These guys are on a roll. Yesterday was giving states legal rights over indigenous nations. Today this. I was already planning to expat soon, but this all makes me want to try to hurry that timeline. Sorry to those of you that are stuck in this hellscape.

I'd like to caution other people who are feeling despondent and thinking of leaving that this is exactly what they want. They want you to give them your homes, your relationships, your friends, your resources, your job and everything you've cared about. So instead of being cynical and celebrating people who are abandoning ship, which I totally understand, we should instead spend time uniting people in opposition. Sta…

If you stay you are giving them your work and taxes, potentially your children.

It's better to gtfo.

Some people are deriving plasure from fighting the fights even at high personal cost. But most people don't.

Your top responsibility is to yourself, to make the best of the short time you have. Fighting loosing fights doesn't seem to be that for most people.

Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

#244

Post by walls » Thu, Jun 30, 2022, 3:29 PM UTC

golemotron wrote: post #70

hnrodey wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Supreme Court is focused on laws, not outcomes - as it should be.

Indeed. People are upset with the Supreme Court recently, but what it has been doing is empowering democracy, which people are nominally for. You want effective standards, do the work and pass a law.

It's just that easy when half of everything is controlled by obstructionists who do nothing other than entrench their parties power.

Oh and they've also convinced their party that cooperation is weakness because they are literally fighting the devil.

Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

#245

Post by JumpCrisscross » Thu, Jun 30, 2022, 3:29 PM UTC

_jal wrote: post #213

nradov wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really how it works. If Congress wants the executive branch to have leeway then they need to explicitly grant it.

Correction: That's exactly how it worked until a large change in the court composition decided to change the rules. People like to pretend that SCOTUS decisions are retroactively true, that somehow they're discovering legal nuances previously overlooked. That's not how it works. As the cliche goes, they're not final because they're right, they're right because they're final.

> how it worked until a large change in the court composition decided to change the rules

FDR created the modern administrative state. Chevron was decided in the 80s. None of this is how it’s always been.

Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

#246

Post by Clubber » Thu, Jun 30, 2022, 3:29 PM UTC

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #199

So 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'm not fluent in the decision yet, but at first glance:

It seems congress gave them limited power to regulate environmental protection via a law that was written. The EPA seems to have overstepped its legal boundaries in regulating. Instead of saying, "ah fuck it, let the machine run," the court is forcing congress to actually give it the additional power that it's been using, or to stop.

Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

#247

Post by pclmulqdq » Thu, Jun 30, 2022, 3:29 PM UTC

pupppet wrote: post #106

Everyone stating this is a good thing because it's not the Supreme Court's job to do xyz are conveniently ignoring the fact these decisions are being made due to tribalism, not out of some concern for rule of law.

These people could be part of their respective tribes because they believe that the rule of law dictates one thing or another. Many of these Justices in the past have followed their own philosophies, which happen to align with one party or another.

We just happen to have people who have a very... different... idea about what the law means than their predecessors.

Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

#248

Post by chickenpotpie » Thu, Jun 30, 2022, 3:30 PM UTC

pupppet wrote: post #106

Everyone stating this is a good thing because it's not the Supreme Court's job to do xyz are conveniently ignoring the fact these decisions are being made due to tribalism, not out of some concern for rule of law.

Also, even if the surpreme court was completely correct to do this: why is this their focus? Why is this so much more important than the the thousands of other cases waiting for their attention?

Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

#249

Post by colincooke » Thu, Jun 30, 2022, 3:30 PM UTC

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #199

So 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?

This is too broad of a reading. Unfortunately despite the mission statement of organizations they are limited by their own laws and rules. In this case this is a narrowing of a particular reading of a paritcular rule that was used to limit greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. See https://reason.com/volokh/2022/06/30/supreme-court-rejects-b... for more details

Re: Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

#250

Post by xxpor » Thu, Jun 30, 2022, 3:30 PM UTC

40acres wrote: post #168

I 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…

You have to know the actual motivation:

The point is to limit the administrative state and move power to congress (as you said), because federal rule making is relatively open, and the administration has experts.

If it moves to congress, they'll just take the legislation lobbyists hand them and pass it, because they don't have the expertise to actually write technical regulations.

This is a win for industry.