Unaccountable perpetual bureaucracies have become the new tyrannical dictator only worse. They never die. This decision, if it does what I think it does, is the most liberating decision in my life.

And the commie media is wringing its hands saying this SCOTUS ruling is a "power grab" by the unelected judicial branch of government from the executive branch and it will gut environmental protections. Then they say that courts aren't smart enough to make technical decisions on regulations because regulators are "experts". Funny, but judges have to interpret all other laws as well.

The mental gyrations required to say this are mind boggling. The court is simply putting the interpretation of regulatory laws in the courts where the constitution says it belongs. It will not gut environmental regulations, it will simply require Congress to PASS the regulation with clear wording.

One more piece of proof that Democrat Marxists only care about the result they want and not about the constitution, the law, or due process.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Lefty Sig,

I'm amazed that people are calling this "fascist". Yes, forcing the government to follow it's own rules instead of allowing small groups of unelected bureaucrats to do as they please is a hallmark of fascism.

The word just means "something I don't like" now. Pickles are fascist. The odd numbered Star Trek films are fascist. Badly timed traffic lights are fascist.

quote:

Originally posted by airsoft guy:
I'm amazed that people are calling this "fascist".
<snip>

I’m not. Leftists will probably declare it to be racist as well.

Good bye to the shadow 4th branch of the government.

The older I get the more I realize that Congress is the reason for most of the problems we have.

They rely on lobbyists and activists to draft legislation, they don't bother to read it, they vote along party lines, and they take tons of money from special interests to buy their votes.

They vote in such a way that they can deny responsibility for how things turn out.

They abdicate responsibility for legislation by creating regulatory agencies in the first place. And things like never passing a national abortion law after R v. W was decided, and relying on SCOTUS to maintain the status quo, which they FINALLY decided to refuse to do anymore.

They engage in massive insider trading on stocks and IPO's.

The whole scheme is to enrich themselves, avoid responsibility, and get re-elected. We need term limits, but Congress will never pass term limits on themselves.

The greatest thing the current SCOTUS can do for the country and the future is to consistently decide cases such that Congress is forced to DO THEIR JOBS and not delegate their constitutional responsibilities to anyone else.

With this ruling does this mean that ‘rules and regulations’ invoked by these agencies are now unlawful?

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:
They vote in such a way that they can deny responsibility for how things turn out.

This is why they refuse to pass a line item veto and bury multiple things in a single bill.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:
They vote in such a way that they can deny responsibility for how things turn out.

This is why they refuse to pass a line item veto and bury multiple things in a single bill.

Excellent point.

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
With this ruling does this mean that ‘rules and regulations’ invoked by these agencies are now unlawful?

No.

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
With this ruling does this mean that ‘rules and regulations’ invoked by these agencies are now unlawful?

What it means, I think (and IANAL) is that in defending future legal challenges to their regulating, they cannot just say "because I said so" and win automatically anymore.

I really think the Left is actually more pissed off about this decision now than Roe v Wade.

This really puts a big dent in their plans for the ultimate Nanny State where every citizen has to play Mother May I? to The State.

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:
They vote in such a way that they can deny responsibility for how things turn out.

This is why they refuse to pass a line item veto and bury multiple things in a single bill.

Excellent point.

JMO, the line item veto sounds great on paper, but the reality is it would end up with a POTUS that simply has his staff go through a bill and line out everything he doesn't like, or, line out everything from the other party on a bill that passed the house and senate.

Say you have a R congress and a D POTUS, he could effectively line item out all the R items on a R party passed bill, leaving only the D items in the bill, sign it and it's law deleting the power of the congress. Right now POTUS would have to decide that he/she wants to veto everything and send it back, line item would mean, no sending back, and give the administration side all the power on spending.

It's a dangerous tool to allow one person that power...

[/QUOTE] What it means, I think (and IANAL) is that in defending future legal challenges to their regulating, they cannot just say "because I said so" and win automatically anymore.[/QUOTE]

Nicely put. The regulations do not suddenly go away, nor do the regulatory agencies. The vast federal bureaucracy will remain intact.

What changes is that, if someone sues to obtain relief from a regulatory ruling or position, then the court does not "automatically" dismiss the case because it is required to defer to the agency's interpretation. This will allow the court to hear experts from both sides and render a decision.

It also doesn't mean (as I see all over the internet) that judges (who are supposedly bought by corporations, while I guess agency bureaucrats are not) can just decide whatever they want. The judges will hear expert testimony from both sides, not decide based on their own knowledge.