Comment by sjsdaiuasgdia
6 days ago
> just no longer have an appetite to do any kind of proactive enforcement
The overturning of the Chevron doctrine removed the ability of the government to do many kinds of proactive enforcement.
> Part of me feels like this is intentional and by design
It is absolutely intentional and by design. It aligns with other recent changes in the legal landscape, such as ending the ability for lower federal courts to issue nationwide injunctions. This requires more groups to accumulate more funds to pursue more lawsuits in more regions, re-establishing standing, re-establishing harms, re-arguing against the same harmful and illegal acts.
You're allowed to fight back, but only after you've been harmed, and only at great expense and effort, and with the deck stacked against you at every level.
You basically cannot enforce any laws on corporations when Republicans are in control. ~50% of voters decided that they should be able to do literally anything they want and Buyer Beware is a good way to structure society and commerce.
Do you really think 50% of voters thought this was what they were getting? I think most of them thought “dunno what is going on, but this guy seems confident and says it’ll be good if we vote for him”.
that's what I voted for and I'm happy about it. same for every single person in my circle.
you may not understand the other side because of biases but if you just say "oh 50% must be crazy / be stupid" then noone can have an honest debate. but I guess gone are those days.
15 replies →
> The overturning of the Chevron doctrine removed the ability of the government to do many kinds of proactive enforcement.
How does stopping agencies from making up their own interpretation of laws do anything to prevent proactive enforcement? (Do you just mean they're now more limited in their ability to make up new laws and proactively enforce those? I'm pretty sure prohibitions on false advertising are actual laws.)
The legislative process (particularly nowadays) moves too slow to react to changes in the real world. The administrative processes provided a gap-fill function that could be somewhat more responsive. That is now lost.
Okay, if that's what you meant then I don't think it's pertinent to this specific situation, since false advertising laws passed by the legislature already exist. They just need to be enforced.
Speaking more generally beyond the context of this specific situation, I agree representative democracy moves slower than other systems of government, but I personally don't think that's sufficient justification for ceding control of the legislative process to an unelected oligarchy. I think the overturning of cheveron was good push back against that trend.