During a major hearing this week, the conservative justices made clear theyā€™re about to gut the federal governmentā€™s power to regulateā€”and take that power for themselves.

The Supreme Court heard two consolidated cases yesterday that could reshape the legal landscape and, with them, the country. The cases take on Chevron deferenceā€”the idea that courts should defer to executive agencies when applying regulations passed by Congress. Theyā€™re the most important cases about democracy on the courtā€™s docket this year, and I say that knowing full well that the court is also set to decide whether a raving, orange criminal can run again for president, and whether former presidents are immune from prosecution for their crimes in the first place.

Thatā€™s because what conservatives on the court are quietly trying to do is pull off the biggest judicial power grab since 1803, when it elevated itself to be the final arbiter of the Constitution in Marbury v. Madison. Theyā€™re trying to place their unelected, unaccountable policy preferences ahead of the laws made by the elected members of Congress or rules instituted by the president. If conservatives get their way, elections wonā€™t really matter, because courts will be able to limit the scope of congressional regulation and the ability of presidents to enforce those regulations effectively. And the dumbest justice of all, alleged attempted rapist Brett Kavanaugh, basically said so during oral arguments.

Iā€™m contractually obligated to tell you that the cases were technically about fees that fisheries are required to pay to federal observers. But all the justices talked about was Chevron deference. Only Justice Sonia Sotomayor even bothered to mention the fish, three hours and 20 minutes into a three-and-a-half-hour hearing.

  • OpenStars@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    31
    Ā·
    10 months ago

    Since I get the smallest sense that you might be not be purely sea-lioning / trolling, okay then:

    Your lack of insight into these issues does not translate into your opinion of them being the sole reality that is ever even remotely possible. Isnā€™t it at least possible that there there is the tiniest, smallest sliver of connection between those events? Pretend that you were giving me the benefit of the doubt: what could I have meant there?

    Also, por que no los dos? But Iā€™m sure that everything will be fine, somehowā€¦ with no effort required on behalf of anyone at allā€¦ (/s to be clear)

    In actual fact though, RGB did have some power, as too did Hillary Clinton when she ran against Trump, causing more people to vote against her than for him and thus handing the entire Presidency for a full term to a man who literally only wanted to run as a publicity stunt for his latest new TV seriesā€¦ Hey, remember when he almost caused a coup thus ending democracy? Hey, remember when he literally assassinated a general of a foreign government? Hey, remember when he almost started WWIII? Which time you ask, well in that particular instance I meant with China, but good on you to realize that there were multiple such events!:-D

    And now, b/c Kamala Harris has been hidden from public eyes (with good reason actually, on multiple aspects - one being her dedication to solve congressional gridlock caused by Republicans, the other, reportedly, being her absolute ineptness in solving any problem handed to her, instead preferring to cry ā€œunfairā€ that the task was given to her at all - even though she literally ran for the job of the actual, full-time job of the President of the entire United States of America), libs are asked to vote for Biden - the same as happened with Hillary (hey, funny story: remember when THAT happened? but Donald Trump managed to win instead?! yeahā€¦ good times, good timesā€¦ except, you know, not that:-P), with the major secondary thought that Harris will need to step in, as you mentioned. i.e., a vote for him = some proportion at least of a vote for her. But what is she all about? How can she handle pressure fromā€¦ sayā€¦ Putin?

    Probably you are saying that if you compare her to Trump then there is no comparison. I am with you there actually. But you arenā€™t exactly communicating your side very well, leaving me to have to guess here what you might have meant! :-D You are angry - good! Itā€™s a very fucked up situation!:-( Now figure out the right way to move forward, before you take even a single step, b/c otherwise it might be in the wrong direction. Thatā€™s what I meant. No, I do not know what that should be, hence why I reported only the parts that I see so far.:-| Truth is more complicated than fiction, very often.

      • Randomgal@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        Ā·
        10 months ago

        Agreed. Ifc if the guy is right if heā€™s condescending af. Didnā€™t even. Read that shit.