Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Supreme Court limits EPA’s power to cut emissions

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 1001 posts

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

#261

Post by Clubber »

Covzire wrote: post #187
bastardoperator wrote: post #38

I 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...

In this case, as I understand it, the EPA was declaring they had authority to enforce some new rules by interpreting where congress wrote "may" as "must". Whether you agree with the EPA's motives or not, it should concern everyone that un-elected bureaucrats have been increasingly inventing or hallucinating the language of their mandates to turn them into whatever they wanted, whenever it suits them, and this was a m…

Agreed, the executive branch (the bureaucracies) does not make laws, congress does. The fact that the bureaucracies are governing above and beyond what they are legally allowed to do is actually horrifying and very undemocratic.

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

#262

Post by queuebert »

scotty79 wrote: post #243
ericmay wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

We can't take the natural resources, benefits of geography, and nuclear weapons with us, so those we leave behind will inherit a very powerful nation. Something to think about.

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

#263

Post by kergonath »

DantesKite wrote: post #50

I 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.

In the end, they still accept or reject laws, with no accountability whatsoever. The supreme court’s decisions are laws, for all intent and purposes, and have just as much weight as what Congress writes.

The incestuous relationship between the judiciary and the legislative branch in common law systems is very problematic and does not allow true separation of powers. Like so much in our democratic governments, this works as long as most participants behave in good faith, but breaks down when some do not.

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

#264

Post by andrekandre »

DantesKite wrote: post #50

I 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.

  > instead of treating it like a second version of Congress.
what do you mean specifically?

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

#265

Post by matthewdgreen »

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…

Reminder: decisions like Roe v. Wade (and many others in the era before this court) weren't passed by "the left" in a political sense. For example: five of the seven-justice majority in Roe were Republican appointees.

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

#266

Post by boringg »

DantesKite wrote: post #50

I 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.

The way in which judges are brought to the bench in America and subsequently to SCOTUS is political. While it isn't Congress it isn't as independent as many people previously portrayed it.

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

#267

Post by ceejayoz »

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…

> Congress can fix everything that’s happened in the last few weeks via proper laws.

SCOTUS deliberately kneecapped the Voting Rights Act quite a bit in recent years. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelby_County_v._Holder

Legislation isn't much protection from a nakedly partisan Court.

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

#268

Post by mark_l_watson »

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.

While I think that I understand your feelings, here is something to consider: Yuval Noah Harari (historian who has written some great books for understanding the world) recently said that if countries like the USA can solve the partisanship problems we have then there is no limit to where our society and civilization can go.

This seems well worth working hard for.

My personal approach is to be very hard on family members and friends who if democrats talk about republicans as evil incarnate and if they are republicans then talk about democrats as woke idiots who are ruining the country.

I try to point out how stupid both sides are and they are fighting the wrong battles against the wrong enemy.

Another reason to stay in the USA: currently the world is splitting into two economies led by:

1) BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) - they will probably have about 60% of the world's population aligned with them.

2) USA/Europe/Canada/Australia/etc. - they will probably have about 40% of the world's population aligned with them.

Except for the USA and Russia who have the resources (food, energy, defensibility), I think that most all of the other countries can not exist without external trade. If the shit really hits the fan for the world, being in the USA might be a very good thing, even if we don't solve the political bigotry of democrats and republicans hating each other.

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

#270

Post by azemetre »

rabuse wrote: post #186
Miner49er wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is impossible to keep partisanship out of the court, so it is a lot like a second version of Congress.

The constitution isn't partisan though.

Parts of the constitution were literally written to appease slave owners. How is that not partisan?
Post reply on HN