Cheveron deference is dead!!!

milktree said:
Did Chevron require, or simply allow, courts to just trust that .gov regulations were reasonable?
Click to expand...
Not just reasonable, but that their interpretation of it was correct just because it came from the government, thus bypassing the need for Congressional approval as otherwise required.

Chevron says government can make a regulation, and they don't need congress to give it a yes/no. So the power is taken away from congress and put solely in the hands of a government moron(s). Without that hurdle, the federal governments expansion skyrocketed. This ruling finally puts an end to it.
 
Last edited:
Rob Boudrie said:
The danger from the debate is that Biden could be replaced by someone who has a better chance of beating Trump.
Click to expand...
And the last two opinions against the SECs power and Chevron add fuel to the fire to pack the court.

The left is going to put BAMN on the same drugs as Biden in order to secure the Whitehouse and the senate so they can reverse the course of scotus permanently.
 
This is huge. The following was written by Dr. Robert Malone.

"In a major blow to US Federal Administrative State power, the US Supreme Court overturned the Chevron Deference precedent by a 6 to 3 vote. Chevron deference is an administrative law principle that compels federal courts to defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous or unclear statute that Congress delegated to the agency to administer. As a consequence, executive branch administrative agencies have been able to step into the policy and power vacuums created when the legislative branch fails to define legislative intent clearly, and to functionally define law and policy as each agency sees fit.

Today’s majority opinion states that

“Chevron, decided in 1984 by a bare quorum of six Justices, triggered a marked departure from the traditional judicial approach of independently examining each statute to determine its meaning. “

The Chevron Deference principle was established in the 1984 U.S. Supreme Court case Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. Conservatives have long argued that this precedent represents judicial activism at its worst and violates fundamental aspects of the constitutionally defined separation of powers by empowering executive branch administrative agencies to functionally make law. Liberals have argued that It allows agencies to implement laws and regulations more flexibly, giving them the authority to interpret ambiguous statutes. This way of thinking believes such delegation of authority to the bureaucracy can lead to more efficient and effective regulation, as agencies are better equipped to address complex issues than the legislature is.

Since the 1984 case, the resulting explosive growth of administrative agencies and their budgets, coupled with Chevron-associated legal barriers to administrative accountability, has given rise to a massive, arrogant, parasitic administrative state that has come to believe that its actions and motivations are above reproach or questioning. This doctrine has underpinned the arrogance of Dr. Anthony Fauci and colleagues at NIH so recently on display in congressional hearings for all who wish to see it. This case has enabled the administrative state to grow so large that many agencies have developed their own judiciary. Prosecutors and judges are unique to each agency, with the power to indict and force you to go to trial all within the structure of the agency - basically, each agency creates its own law and then acts as judge, prosecutor, and jury. No separation of powers, just one hand washing the other, all unified collusion. A self-contained, unconstitutional fourth branch of government with each agency operating under the protective legal umbrella of being defined as the ultimate authority in all matters involving legislative - or scientific and technical- interpretations.

Fundamentally, 40 years ago, an activist Supreme Court determined that a Administrative Agency’s interpretation of any statute that it administers is entitled to judicial deference unless Congress explicitly says otherwise. Which is to say that congressional legislation means whatever the administrative state determines it means, and this could not be legally challenged.

All of the arbitrary, capricious, and medically unsound administrative actions by FDA, CDC, NIH, and other HHS branches during the COVIDcrisis derived their authority from Chevron. This legal precedent has been what has powered the notoriously arbitrary and capricious actions of the EPA in setting the policies which restrict local small farm-oriented animal processing activities and advantage large centralized slaughterhouses. This is the legal precedent that has powered the federal requirements concerning the use of natural gas for cooking and heating and requirements for battery-powered electric semi-tractors for long-haul trucking. Functionally, this tendency of the courts to grant legal deference to administrative bureaucracies has trickled all the way down to school boards.

But as of today, the dark days of arbitrary, capricious, and unaccountable administrative actions are over. This decision's consequences will reverberate across the American legal and regulatory landscape for decades."
 
This decision really makes practicing CPAs like me and other practitioners looking to the IRS for interpretation of a tax provision and leaves the answer to a judge who may not have any tax experience whatsoever. IRS interpretation allowed for better planning and strategy and even finding loopholes!

Now a similar case could be in two very different jurisdictions. Do you recommend paying now and get tagged with penalties and interest later (depending on timing) or do they hope for a massive refund with accrued interest to come back to them while something winds its way through the courts and is decided in their favor?

I appreciate what the decision means for other things, but it’s incredibly broad and is going to bog down already overloaded court dockets.
 
SKumar said:
Not just reasonable, but that their interpretation of it was correct just because it came from the government, thus bypassing the need for Congressional approval as otherwise required.

Chevron says government can make a regulation, and they don't need congress to give it a yes/no. So the power is taken away from congress and put solely in the hands of a government moron(s). Without that hurdle, the federal governments expansion skyrocketed. This ruling finally puts an end to it.
Click to expand...
Folks, I am the loudest voice you may have heard cheering the internment of Chevron. However the quoted description of what Chevron stood for -- and thus what has been interned -- isn't quite right. Best for those interested to read the Loper Bright Enterprises decision itself.
 
AllaSnackbah said:
This is better news than the stupid debate but most people have no idea what it means.
Click to expand...
Caveat: The Chevron issue is arcane and what I am about to say should not be taken as exhaustive. I reiterate that those interested should read the opinion itself.

Warnings out of the way: the long overdue demise of Chevron means that administrative agencies no longer have the power to define, in some circumstances, the extent of their own statutory authority, and (at least in my judgment) Congress no longer has the power to kick the agency jurisdiction issue ball to the agencies.

Same warning: look down the road for a like demise of the equally pernicious "delegation doctrine" (or, more precisely, the resurrection of the "anti-delegation doctrine"). Hint, both today's happy event, and (hopefully) tomorrow's happy event share a basis in the separation of powers imbued in our Constitution.
 
1.) A private company getting busted somehow by the EPA(?) for using dry ice (CO2) dropped into rodent tunnels to kill rodents without first getting license?
2.) A private company getting busted somehow by the EPA(?) for using steam (H2O) to kill microorganisms/pathogens without first getting license?

Does the demise of this Chevron thing relate to the above examples?
 
JoseyWales said:
1.) A private company getting busted somehow by the EPA(?) for using dry ice (CO2) dropped into rodent tunnels to kill rodents without first getting license?
2.) A private company getting busted somehow by the EPA(?) for using steam (H2O) to kill microorganisms/pathogens without first getting license?

Does the demise of this Chevron thing relate to the above examples?
Click to expand...
One cannot tell based only on what has been provided. It depends on how the EPA defends the regulations and what the governing statute says.
 
This decision is a huge deal as a ruling that prevents other agencies from overreaching their authority. That said, I think this ruling is a hollow victory for 2A. There has not been a single lower court ruling that used Chevron in the post-Bruen era. The Bruen test has made it impossible to use chevron.
 
40 Creedmoor fan said:
This decision is a huge deal as a ruling that prevents other agencies from overreaching their authority. That said, I think this ruling is a hollow victory for 2A. There has not been a single lower court ruling that used Chevron in the post-Bruen era. The Bruen test has made it impossible to use chevron.
Click to expand...
I think what Chevron will do is kill a regulatory ruling before it is made. For instance, there never would have been the pistol brace hokey pokey regarding interpretation by the ATF and bump stocks never would have had to be signed off on and then retracted after Vegas.

I think this will also do wonders for 80% lowers.
 
T-Unit said:
I think what Chevron will do is kill a regulatory ruling before it is made. For instance, there never would have been the pistol brace hokey pokey regarding interpretation by the ATF and bump stocks never would have had to be signed off on and then retracted after Vegas.

I think this will also do wonders for 80% lowers.
Click to expand...
We're just getting started buddy. Like others said, this ruling is insane. No more intentionally vague descriptions that are left to government interpretation.

And then Vivek gets a WH position on top --> SHUT IT DOWN X 1000000
 
I think that this was inevitable after WV v. EPA and Cargill v. Garland. Both cases seriously curtailed the ability of Executive Branch agencies to make law by fiat. Overturning Chevron is going to lead to a lot of litigation to dismantle or at least curtail the administrative state.
 

Similar threads

Cargill is in! ATF ban on bump stocks is shot doen
Replies
11
Views
579
Tartakovsky
Tartakovsky
  • Locked
Yeah. This is a brilliant idea.
Replies
8
Views
321
drgrant
drgrant
USCCA. Is it worth it?
Replies
14
Views
460
NHKevin
NHKevin
What the heck is it? Ammo Edition
Replies
11
Views
424
Mountain
Mountain
Is this a high points retarded cousin?
Replies
29
Views
952
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Back
Top Bottom