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

5th Circuit Court Finds SEC Enforcement Unconstitutional [pdf]

ca5.uscourts.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 191 posts

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

#81

Post by [deleted] »

xyzzyz wrote: post #59
linkjuice4all wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I dislike poorly written laws (including those that work around some failing of our current "state" of government) and judges lacking accountability - this seems to be in the same league as the EPA Regulator Case[0] that's sitting at the Supreme Court right now. The end-goal doesn't appear to be justice for the aggrieved party but more so the elimination of agency-issued oversight. The jurisprudence seems to fo…

> On a basic level this seems to make sense but the practical application of this would mean that legislators would need to explicitly pass legislation anytime a regulatory body needs to address a specific issue or regulate some behavior 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…

[deleted]

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

#82

Post by ihumanable »

snowwrestler wrote: post #46
rayiner wrote: 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…

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 Power Plants based on service area, customers, and operating capacity on Wednesday and so forth.

The dismantling of the administrative state leaves us in a precarious position where we either end up completely unregulated (which I know some people would welcome, but as someone that enjoys not getting asbestos in my breakfast cereal, I think we need some regulations). Do we just end up with massive packages of regulations written up by ALEC and other private groups that then get handed to legislators and passed?

Sure an unelected bureaucrat sounds bad, but if the alternative of paying some guy $40k a year to think about these issues and draw up regulation is to let the person being regulated write their own rules, I'll take the former. I suspect the latter regulations will end up being whatever makes the most profit for the person being regulated, and if we all have to breathe lead because it makes some company's profits go up then so be it.

The government isn't always on the side of the common man, but neither are multinational corporations, and the multinational corporations are pretty up front about being in it for themselves.

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

#83

Post by [deleted] »

snowwrestler wrote: post #46
rayiner wrote: 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…

[deleted]

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

#84

Post by vmception »

civilized wrote: post #75
vmception wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The courts and agencies still have the option of finding a different rationale to reach the same desired goal. If they can't, then they have to rely on Congress, if they can't then national government cant be involved. Simple order of operations.

Legally, it's a very flimsy basis on which to attack the current structure and operation of the country. It is simply untrue that Congress is not allowed to delegate its powers, and where to draw the line has always been a subjective judgment that different courts have drawn differently. https://constitution.findlaw.com/article1/annotation03.html And frankly, I think the anti-administrative state people are on the pa…

You're in luck, my excerpt from today's court ruling is immediately followed by acknowledging more recent rulings.

> According to the Supreme Court’s more recent formulations of that longstanding rule, Congress may grant regulatory power to another entity only if it provides an “intelligible principle” by which the recipient of the power can exercise it.

But then the hits just keep on coming

> We first conclude that Congress has delegated to the SEC what would be legislative power absent a guiding intelligible principle.

>cue laugh track

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

#85

Post by vmception »

munificent wrote: post #78
vmception wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every creature from the New Deal is probably unconstitutional. Additional context on that threat of court packing is that the Supreme Court was already invalidating and gutting the New Deal! Its such an important story to me because my grade school history books all upheld the New Deal as this monumental and amazing thing. From what I can tell, 75% of it (or 75% of the programs it created) was declared unconstitution…

I think implicit in your comment is that the New Deal must not actually be amazing because it turns out that it's likely unconstitutional but... how does that logically follow? It's not like the Constitution was handed down from the heavens as a flawless document. It may be that the New Deal does contain many unconstitutional provisions, but also that that same legislature was in fact a net benefit for Americans.

Net positive and constitutional are mutually exclusive concepts. That I do agree, and I agree that my earlier statement doesn't seem to give room for that level of nuance.

It just so happens that all my causes and grudges are from creatures of the New Deal, and I'm not in a position to bring them before the courts yet. Imagine my excitement when I realized how flimsy that era's legislative flurry really was.

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

#86

Post by vannevar »

snowwrestler wrote: post #46
rayiner wrote: 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…

>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.

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

#87

Post by ceejayoz »

rootusrootus wrote: post #10
djbusby wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't US military have their own code of justice and court system?

Sure, but this is about constraints by the Constitution, and military members do not give up their Constitutional protections when they enlist.

The UCMJ forbids military members from "contemptuous speech" against the President and others in the chain of command. They may have some Constitutional protections, but they're hardly identical to those of civilians.

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

#88

Post by gamblor956 »

chrsig wrote: post #68
vmception wrote: post #40

> In keeping with Founding conceptions of separation of powers, the Supreme Court has made clear that Congress cannot “delegate to the Courts, or to any other tribunals, powers which are strictly and exclusively legislative.” I love this. I hope this trend catches on, I can't wait to gut these bloated agencies and force Congress to get back to work at the risk of a completely paralyzed society if they don't. Any supr…

> I love this. I hope this trend catches on, I can't wait to gut these bloated agencies and force Congress to get back to work at the risk of a completely paralyzed society if they don't. You seem to be making the bold assumption that both parties are acting in good faith. A completely paralyzed society is actually a victory for one party.

Agreed, a paralyzed society is one where corruption flourishes unchecked.

Of course, given what happened with the last presidency, that is probably the desired outcome for everyone rooting for paralysis.

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

#89

Post by [deleted] »

munificent wrote: post #78
vmception wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every creature from the New Deal is probably unconstitutional. Additional context on that threat of court packing is that the Supreme Court was already invalidating and gutting the New Deal! Its such an important story to me because my grade school history books all upheld the New Deal as this monumental and amazing thing. From what I can tell, 75% of it (or 75% of the programs it created) was declared unconstitution…

I think implicit in your comment is that the New Deal must not actually be amazing because it turns out that it's likely unconstitutional but... how does that logically follow? It's not like the Constitution was handed down from the heavens as a flawless document. It may be that the New Deal does contain many unconstitutional provisions, but also that that same legislature was in fact a net benefit for Americans.

[deleted]

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

#90

Post by ceejayoz »

tomcam wrote: post #11
paxys wrote: post #5

Sets an interesting precedent for literally every other federal body that "acts as prosecutor and judge" while skipping the judicial system. Should everyone fighting an immigration or deportation case be able to request a jury trial? What about the military? Labor violations? EPA fines?

Anyone can request a jury trial in the USA. It's guaranteed by the Constitution.

Mandatory arbitration clauses seem to hold up in court fairly regularly.
Post reply on HN