The Decline of SCOTUS into a Partisan Political Body

[jthomas666]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1806712588991881463

 

[Bazza]

The justice department overstepping?

 

[CrimsonJazz]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1806712588991881463

That's a win for everybody.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

 

[jthomas666]

I guess Paul is fine being ruled by the whims of unaccountable justices.

 

[Bamaro]

I guess the fix was in. No reason for SC to wait until the very last minute to announce the trump immunity ruling. IMO, they will rule correctly against immunity so they are delaying it until the very last minute to assure the delay will keep trump out of court until after the election but if he wins, that wont happen.

 

[NationalTitles18]

The Supreme Court just made a massive power grab it will come to regret

Welcome to hell, SCOTUS.

www.vox.com

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo fully consolidates the Court’s dominance over federal agencies within the executive branch of government. It is a radical reordering of the US separation of powers, giving the one unelected branch of government all of its own power, plus much of the power that Congress has vested in the executive branch.

Loper Bright overrules a Reagan-era Supreme Court decision known as Chevron v. National Resources Defense Council (1984), which held that when a federal statute delegating policymaking authority to an agency is ambiguous, courts typically should defer to the agency’s reading of that statute rather than trying to resolve the ambiguity itself.
The reasons for this deference were twofold. As Chevron explained, “judges are not experts” in the kind of difficult policy questions that come before federal agencies. Think of questions like whether a product derived from red rice yeast, which purportedly helps promote healthy cholesterol levels, counts as a “drug” or a “dietary supplement” under federal law? Under Chevron, this question would be decided by FDA officials who’ve spent decades studying drugs and dietary supplements. Now it will be resolved by political appointees with law degrees and black robes.

The other justification for Chevron is democracy. “While agencies are not directly accountable to the people,” the Court said in Chevron, the leaders of agencies are political appointees, and they answer to a president who is accountable to the voters. And so “it is entirely appropriate for this political branch of the Government to make such policy choices,” rather than placing that power in the hands of unelected political appointees who serve for life.
Chevron was initially celebrated as a triumph by many prominent Republicans. It was 1984 and President Ronald Reagan was cruising to a landslide reelection, and Republicans appeared likely to control federal agencies for years into the future. Many federal courts, meanwhile, were still dominated by liberal Johnson and Carter appointees who were prone to striking down the Reagan administration’s deregulatory actions. So Chevron meant that those courts would have to butt out and let Reagan and his appointees determine the direction of government.
One of its biggest cheerleaders was Justice Antonin Scalia, the conservative icon, who predicted in a 1989 lecture that “in the long run Chevron will endure and be given its full scope” because it “reflects the reality of government, and thus more adequately serves its needs” than the alternative.

Striking down Chevron is not a good thing.

The courts always have a check on the executive, but this will open the floodgates to SCOTUS deciding things it has no expertise and no business deciding.

 

[jthomas666]

 

[92tide]

conservative christian values

 

[92tide]

The Supreme Court just made a massive power grab it will come to regret

Welcome to hell, SCOTUS.

www.vox.com

Striking down Chevron is not a good thing.

The courts always have a check on the executive, but this will open the floodgates to SCOTUS deciding things it has no expertise and no business deciding.

this seems sort of related

Supreme Court Corrects EPA Opinion After Gorsuch ‘Nitrous Oxide’ Error

The error came in an opinion blocking an EPA policy meant to improve air pollution.

www.forbes.com

KEY FACTS
The court revised its opinion in Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency, a 5-4 ruling released Thursday in which the court temporarily blocked an EPA policy requiring “upwind” states to reduce air pollution that travels down to “downwind” states and affects the air quality there.

Gorsuch—and his clerks, who would have helped prepare the opinion—referred five times in his opinion to “nitrous oxide,” which is a greenhouse gas that’s more commonly known as an anesthetic and referred to as “laughing gas.”

The opinion actually meant to refer to “nitrogen oxide,” an air pollutant that the EPA’s policy at issue was aimed at reducing.

 

[NationalTitles18]

this seems sort of related

Supreme Court Corrects EPA Opinion After Gorsuch ‘Nitrous Oxide’ Error

The error came in an opinion blocking an EPA policy meant to improve air pollution.

www.forbes.com

KEY FACTS
The court revised its opinion in Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency, a 5-4 ruling released Thursday in which the court temporarily blocked an EPA policy requiring “upwind” states to reduce air pollution that travels down to “downwind” states and affects the air quality there.

Gorsuch—and his clerks, who would have helped prepare the opinion—referred five times in his opinion to “nitrous oxide,” which is a greenhouse gas that’s more commonly known as an anesthetic and referred to as “laughing gas.”

The opinion actually meant to refer to “nitrogen oxide,” an air pollutant that the EPA’s policy at issue was aimed at reducing.

The mistake was seized on by critics of the court’s conservative majority, with writer Elie Mystal noting on X, “Remember folks, Neil Gorsuch thinks that he should have the final say on environmental regulations, not the experts at the EPA.”

It would be funny were it not so serious.

 

[JDCrimson]

So in the last week, SCOTUS has...

- Ruled bribes are now gifts
- Overturned the Chevron doctrine

Looks like SCOTUS staged a coup while no one was paying attention...

 

[Chukker Veteran]

I hope Biden’s team has looked closely at what they can get done within the SC’s Presidential immunity case decision, whatever it might be.

At this point, I would not begrudge Biden making some dictatorial decisions.

 

[Bazza]

Chevron Doctrine goes down and the Constitution is back! This Supreme Court is honestly kind of iconic.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1806774421195300951

 

[JDCrimson]

There are a lot banking regulations that are good and we kind of need them...

Chevron Doctrine goes down and the Constitution is back! This Supreme Court is honestly kind of iconic.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1806774421195300951

 

[AWRTR]

I hope Biden’s team has looked closely at what they can get done within the SC’s Presidential immunity case decision, whatever it might be.

At this point, I would not begrudge Biden making some dictatorial decisions.

So you are for dictators as long as they are of the ideological bent that you like?

 

[CrimsonJazz]

So you are for dictators as long as they are of the ideological bent that you like?

I’m Pretty certain he wasn’t serious. But it does bring up an important point. The far left and far right both have 3 things in common. One, they both love to weaponize the judicial branch to advance their retarded ideologies. Two, they claim to love democracy when they clearly do not. And three, they both love wiping their asses with the constitution when it suits them.

Watching the extremists argue is like watching a bum fight. They fight out of some misplaced sense of superiority, but at the end of the day, they’re both still just a pair of bums.

 

[Chukker Veteran]

So you are for dictators as long as they are of the ideological bent that you like?

As long as he wears the proper dictator outfit.

if the SC rules absolute immunity for Trump as his lawyers argue, why wouldn’t Biden take advantage of his new power?

A president with absolute immunity is a threat to the SC as well as everything else.

 

[Bamaro]

As long as he wears the proper dictator outfit.

if the SC rules absolute immunity for Trump as his lawyers argue, why wouldn’t Biden take advantage of his new power?

A president with absolute immunity is a threat to the SC as well as everything else.

If the SC was going to rule absolute immunity they probably wouldn't have delayed it this long. The delay was done on purpose. They should have moved as quickly on this as they did in Bush v Gore.

 

[JDCrimson]

They could be waiting to give absolute immunity to the preferred President...

If the SC was going to rule absolute immunity they probably wouldn't have delayed it this long. The delay was done on purpose. They should have moved as quickly on this as they did in Bush v Gore.