← Back to context

Comment by A4ET8a8uTh0

1 year ago

Yes. Heavens forfend if they had to do the job they asked to be elected to do.

In short, good. How many here can even map the entire list of all the agencies and corresponding rules, recommendations, and guidance that has the weight of law.

<< It will cause chaos and disaster if congress has to make regulations for every little thing.

Free people pull in all sorts of directions. Its going to be ok.

They have done the job they were asked to do.

Prior courts said that they were going to use Chevron deference when interpreting the laws that congress passed, since it keeps them simpler, and allows the executive branch to apply common sense (while retaining safeguards in case agencies overstep their bounds).

The current court has repeatedly decided to arbitrarily reinterpret settled portions of the law by overturning existing rulings. Getting rid of chevron deference would be a continuation of that, though on a scale that probably exceeds the fraction of the US legal code the court has actually read.

The current courts' actions are unprecedented in the US. The Supreme Court is not supposed to overturn prior Supreme Court rulings, except in exceptional circumstances. They even went so far as to mostly overturn the 4th amendment when they eliminated the right to privacy as part of the Roe v. Wade ruling.

At this point they're looking more like an unchecked legislative branch than a judicial body. This is the reason they are wildly unpopular. They understand this, and they've explicitly said they don't plan to follow the wishes of the electorate. On top of that they've done a lot to undermine US election integrity with recent rulings.

However, given ongoing demographic shifts, there's a good chance they'll have to cope with a unified executive and legislative branch. At that point, expect court packing or impeachments. The only other path I see is some sort of apartheid-style setup designed to ignore the votes of anyone that's urban, educated, female, minority, or not elderly.

This argument reminds me of people who wish for our credit system to burn down so they don’t owe money anymore. Both are completely short sighted and would result in catastrophic outcomes.

We (unfortunately) need credit now. And we (unfortunately) cannot depend on congress to do anything.