EPA Loses In 6-3 SCOTUS Decision

[pknopp]

Congress can't write the policies of every federal agency. So there has to be some middle ground to give regulatory agencies the authority to regulate as they see fit.

If we leave all of that up to the do nothing congress, then we might as well just delete the agencies.

If that is the choices, fine with me.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Congress can't write the policies of every federal agency. So there has to be some middle ground to give regulatory agencies the authority to regulate as they see fit.

If we leave all of that up to the do nothing congress, then we might as well just delete the agencies.

I bet I could vote on 2,000 Bills in one day.

 

[jc456]

Hmm I wonder why no first world country ever has ever done something that stupid?

No I don't.

we use to have no regulatory agencies. We still lead the globe. What's your fking issue?

 

[jc456]

I bet I could vote on 2,000 Bills in one day.

they can't pay that many people off.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I bet I could vote on 2,000 Bills in one day.

And that would just clear the stalled bills off of Mitch McConnell's desk.

 

[jc456]

And that would just clear the stalled bills off of Mitch McConnell's desk.

he's the majority leader? hmmmmmm how is that possible exactly?

 

[Mr Natural]

Only in Conservatopia is spewing more shit into the air a good thing.

 

[Burgermeister]

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts ruled that “it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme.”

“A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body,” he added.

This is a massive precedent that allows challenges to any disruptive regulation, which is great. Unelected partisan hacks making these decisions makes no sense and sets up all kinds of problems, like a petulant president throwing some ridiculous regs over the wall on his way out. These are legislative decisions. Unfortunately, the Court is providing an out by suggesting that the legislative branch can assign its power to the executive branch. I missed that section of the Constitution and I certainly don't agree to that.

 

[Burgermeister]

Case in point -

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Case in point -

Of course, Abbott had to make up a lie as the first line of his tweet.

 

[1srelluc]

Shocking since they upheld the Clean Air Act's delegated authority unanimously in 2001. I guess Trump really has finally broken America for a generation.

Fixed and forced to legislate changes is more like it.

 

[Dekster]

Fixed and forced to legislate changes is more like it.

The whole prior decision was about whether or not Congress could delegate authority to the EPA. The SCOTUS then said yes. It did not require EPA rule-making to be "legislated".

 

[1srelluc]

This is really a big deal. The EPA has cost my business tens of thousands with it's silly regulations. I wonder if we can go back to releasing freon instead of having to recapture it. I wonder if treated lumber can now go back to the old formula where you didn't need special expensive coated screws.

What regulations does this undo? Who makes the call?

I suspect any rules changes that did not get congressional approval first can be challenged in court.....It looks like it's just not confined to the EPA either.....Look out ATF.

 

[berg80]

This was the correct ruling based upon the Constitution.

Surely you'll acknowledge it was based on a convenient interpretation of the Constitution that just happens to coincide with extreme right wing ideology. Or perhaps honesty isn't your thing.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Surely you'll acknowledge it was based on a convenient interpretation of the Constitution that just happens to coincide with extreme right wing ideology. Or perhaps honesty isn't your thing.

Not at all. It is sort of cute you accuse me of being right wing, but the real right wingers on here will probably be mad or laugh at you.

There is no way the Constitution allows such power within an agency.

If Congress wants those rules they need to pass them. That is the way our government was designed.

 

[berg80]

The West Virginia case was always a bit bizarre. It centers on President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which aimed to cut greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, the second-largest source of carbon dioxide in the US. But the policy was replaced before it was implemented, and then its replacement was blocked by a federal appeals court. Meanwhile, there were questions about whether the Supreme Court even had jurisdiction to hear the case. As Vox’s Ian Millhiser described it, West Virginia v. EPA is “a case about an environmental regulation that no longer exists, that never took effect, and that would not have accomplished very much if it had taken effect.”

But the decision means that agencies like the EPA can’t create regulations that have expansive social and economic impacts on their own, despite decades of precedent doing exactly that. Such rules would now require Congress to specifically create laws to implement them, and given the difficulty of passing any federal legislation, it would drastically impair the EPA’s ability to regulate the pollution that’s heating up the planet.

The Supreme Court’s EPA ruling isn’t the only legal attack on the environment

West Virginia v. EPA is part of a bigger legal crusade to destroy environmental protections.

www.vox.com

Of course the Court weighed in. It's a doctrinal conservative mantra that legacy power companies must not be prevented from slowly degrading Earth.

 

[eagle1462010]

Surely you'll acknowledge it was based on a convenient interpretation of the Constitution that just happens to coincide with extreme right wing ideology. Or perhaps honesty isn't your thing.

Who elected the EPA to create laws by proxy?

They do NOT HAVE THAT AUTHORITY. That is up to the legislature and the Executive branches.............via VOTING ON IT.........not the EPA going hey we have decided we ARE KINGS and will destroy the economy of West Virginia because we are a climate cult agency now.

 

[1srelluc]

The whole prior decision was about whether or not Congress could delegate authority to the EPA. The SCOTUS then said yes. It did not require EPA rule-making to be "legislated".

Does now and that is all that matters.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

But the decision means that agencies like the EPA can’t create regulations that have expansive social and economic impacts on their own

Which is what the Constitution would require.

Anything with expansive social and economic impacts should be done by our elected officials.

 

[Weatherman2020]

And that would just clear the stalled bills off of Mitch McConnell's desk.

Mitch controls the Senate?
Hilarious