SCOTUS just overturned Chevron deference, GUTTING three-letter agencies

oh and i just thought about those 87,000 irs agents, do they get a boot in the ass now?

That is probably one of the most important decisions made by SCOTUS in recent history.

That will affect a lot of things if it's retroactive. Mining, farming, ranching, and the building of access roads to name a few very important things 3 letter agencies have been trying to put an end to.

a reply to: RickyD

Snyder v. United States

a reply to: Blaine91555

Roberts makes it very clear in his decision this is not retroactive.

a reply to: rickymouse

Congress needs to go through the plethora of laws already on the books and remove those that are obsolete. New laws should have an expiration date, upon which, they would be reviewed, amended as necessary or completely rewritten or removed altogether.

I know this will never happen because our Congress is corrupt from top to bottom, both chambers and both sides of the aisle, but a "girl can dream, can't she?"

well it might seem good to you but get ready for the economy to go crazy since the ftc, sec, etc who have managed our financial stuff can no longer do their job properly, its not gonna be pretty, especially now that inflation is about to skyrocket and now companies can cut wages and deny benefits with no consequences, besides the economic chaos we're gonna have, there's gonna be a whole slew of problems even you conservatives wont like and trump wont be able to fix it even if he wins. this is a power grab attempt going on by the supreme court, this isn't a win for the Republican party like it might appear, its a win for the court, to elevate themselves to the highest authority for their own interests not for trump or the Republican interests, since Congress cant get things together enough to stop them from doing whatever they want.

with that other ruling on bribes for the courts, that means whoever pays more will get favorable rulings, regardless of political affiliation.

gonna be real life judge dredd style courts in our future at this rate.

a reply to: Threadbarer

This is why Donald Trump is promising to eliminating tax on gratuities, if elected. It's not about your waitress, lol.

a reply to: Threadbarer

I haven't read the whole 44 page decision yet but just in my cursory reading of it, it does not appear to be making bribery legal. It was a case to determine if statute 666 (no I am not joking) relates to bribes or gratuities. Congress ammended that statute a while back to base it off of 201b' language...and in this case the decision was that statute 666 is indeed a bribery law. It also defines the difference between bribes and gratuities...bribes are still illegal and gratuities are sometimes allowed but that depends on the city, state, or federal laws governing each respective jurisdiction. Basically what I see is bribe are always illegal but gratuities can sometimes be allowed.

a reply to: Blaine91555

It just means the door is now open for the regulated businesses to challenge the regulations in court.

a reply to: namehere

They sure can do their jobs properly...they just have to do it constitutionally now and don't get to create laws based on their rules. Now they must go to congress so there are checks and balances.

a reply to: RickyD

It's a semantic argument. The only difference the SCOTUS makes between bribes and gratuities is time of payment. If it comes before services rendered, it's a bribe. If it comes after services rendered, it's a gratuity.

So when Justice Thomas is bought a new luxury RV in exchange for how he ruled in overturning Chevron, that will be a gratuity and perfectly legal.

a reply to: RickyD

The thing is, Congress aren't experts on all the things they legislate on. They're probably not experts on anything they legislate on. So it's not reasonable for them to produce airtight, regulatory legislation.

The example Kagan used in her dissent was AI. Congress and the courts don't know anything about the state of AI now, let alone where it will be a year or more from now. So how can Congress create legislation that not only regulates AI now but also in the future and covers all bases?

a reply to: Threadbarer

You are misunderstanding...SCOTUS was only deciding if statute 666 was a law about gratuities or bribes. The differences between the 2 are defined by congress in the laws they made. It also says in most places gratuities aren't allowed...you did read this decision right...not just some news article reporting on it yea?

a reply to: Threadbarer

I mean the majority on congress are former attorneys...so while not experts on everything they mostly are at least well educated in law and law creation. Congress can invite AI experts to testify to them about the state of AI and use that info and their legal experience to write a law.

I wonder if this can put the squelch on the tree hugging lunatics who arbitrarily say gasoline cars and diesel trucks will be banned in 10 years without any citizen vote.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Depends if one or more of the manufacturers takes it to court to challenge those mandates. SCOTUS just opened the door but since its not retroactive each regulation/mandate already on the books must be challenged individually. Last I heard the auto industry in the US is very in the pocket of the government...I mean they did get bailed out a while back.

a reply to: pianopraze

ABCDEFG , Oh I Hate those Agencies !....................Hurray !

originally posted by: Moon68
a reply to: rdambroso

Well, now congress can't just pass an ambiguous law, shuffle it off to ATF, EPA,VA, NOAA, etc. and let the unelected bureaucrats decide what the laws say according to their whims. Congress will have to do their job of writing specific laws and being held accountable to the constituency.

I am thrilled we can stop the stupid at EPA now. Some of their ideas like clean air and water are great. But the idea that some small farmer with a small dry creek in his yard is a navigable waterway is one of many overreaches that need to end. I want my air clean and work to do so, but I do understand all they have done is push the manufacturing and the positives of people working to China. I have for years objected in open meetings at EPA with my peers also agreeing with me and others about the stupidness of some of their regulations. THe carbon crap show they are on I hope ends! The batteries are worse than burning coal and they burn coal to get the charge in them. Geeze.

I am about to retire, and I have already sent some ideas to others in my org on what this will mean.

originally posted by: StoutBroux
They need to get rid of WHO. I didn't realize how much they are in charge of all the Green climate change BS, for the WHOLE world. They are evil, EVIL, E V I L

For all the many agendas they are pushing and all all the control they have, they need to be completely disbanded.

I think they should be tried for RICO on murder of the folks they lied to about Covid, the Jab and masking up the kids.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
How weird that in the same session that this SCOTUS ruled that it's legal to bribe government officials they also make a ruling that tells corporations that if they don't like the way a regulation is being applied to them they can take it to the courts.

All I'll say is that if you're leary about flying in a Boeing jet now, just wait until they get a few judges in their pocket.

It literally has to get better or Boing is BONGED...