• d00phy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Not saying the Chevron deference should have been rejected out of hand, but if it has been cited as much as Kagan says it sounds like Congress needs to work with these agencies to write better laws. Of course some deference will always be needed. The SCOTUS decision was idealism at its worst. They ignore that these agencies act as extensions of Congress. Unfortunately the “originalists” on the court have a childish adherence to their strict interpretation BS.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Go read the building code and then tell me you’d rather have it written by politicians instead of engineers and architects.

    • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      You don’t want congress writing exacting laws in a lot of regulatory situations. Think if congress right now was setting interest rates. It wouldn’t get done until long after the economy had imploded. Even if they were listening to the same economists, political problems would create a disaster. The same is true in most cases concerning the EPA and other regulatory agencies. By the time congress would be able to respond to a situation, everyone would have died of whatever the problem was.

    • TaterTurnipTulip@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Congress has barely been able to pass critical funding bills. Do you really think they’re functional enough to pass highly technical and involved legislation for specific agencies?