During oral arguments, the court’s conservative majority questioned a legal doctrine that gives agencies latitude to craft regulations.

Conservative justices on the Supreme Court on Wednesday pressed the Biden administration on whether ambiguous laws passed by Congress should be interpreted by judges, rather than by federal bureaucrats.

The high court’s eventual ruling could hand courts — including the Supreme Court itself — more power to strike down regulations on health care, the environment, immigration and virtually all other policy areas that are administered by federal agencies. That would strip power from the executive branch and make it harder for Joe Biden and future presidents to defend their regulatory agendas against legal challenges.

“It’s the role of the judiciary historically under the Constitution to police the line between the legislature and the executive to make sure that the executive is not operating as a king,” said Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a critic of the so-called Chevron doctrine that is under fire.

  • rhacer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    10 months ago

    Is this not why we elect Congress, to pass the laws under which we live? We did not elect bureaucrats. We elect legislators.

    It’s why we have three branches of government.

    • kbotc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      10 months ago

      When was the last time we passed legislation of note? 2017? Before that? Obamacare?

      We elected a lot of people who are happy to just let the federal government do nothing and collect a paycheck.

      • rhacer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        I 100% agree, but that does not mean that unelected bureaucrats get to take up that responsibility. The responsibility of voters is to make sure their elected officials are doing their job, and if not then to find those who will.

    • Zorque@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Considering how long, and how political, ever decision going through congress gets… you really want every single action of the government to be based on the constant bickering of politicians?

      The reason we have these federal agencies is so that decisions can be made without political motivation.

      • rhacer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Yes. That’s why our system is government is designed the way it is.

        Why should anyone be held accountable for the decisions of those they did not ask to govern them?

        Our Republic was designed to give everyone a voice. When those who are unaccountable to the electorate govern something is very wrong.

        • PeepinGoodArgs@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Why should anyone be held accountable for the decisions of those they did not ask to govern them?

          Because those decisions affect those they don’t govern, too.

          When those who are unaccountable to the electorate govern something is very wrong.

          Are you kidding? Businesses do more governing in every way at local and arguably states levels than any other entity, and they are the most unaccountable institution in America. We have several unaccountable businessmen trying to run for president, the most unaccountable people on the planet.

          Federal agencies are answerable to the executive branch, which is directly accountable to the people. And they jump through a lot of hoops to ensure they do actually remain accountable. I mean, you can comment on proposed regulatory changes here, at Regulations.gov.