SCOTUS GUTS Administrative State, PROTECTS Censorship

Krystal and Saagar discuss SCOTUS throwing out the Chevron Doctrine.

To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and Spotify





#news #politics #youtube

[michaeiprice]

Saagar is rawdogging these shows hard this week

[smuse]

I swear half the precedent for the laws in this country are based on a lawsuit involving a fishery

[charliedarwin]

And as for Chevron, boo-boo if Congress actually has to do work, pass laws, and make them clear and comprehensible. What the hell else are they supposed to be doing?

[Randyme]

This is going to have a big impact on the ATF also. They changed around a RULE in regard to pistol braces that made 18 million people felons overnight. No 3 letter agency should have that much power. Thankfully that RULE was just thrown out in federal court and they are now legal for everyone. Everyone that lost theirs in a boating accident found that they miraculously washed up on shore.

[Eek-A-Mouse_Fan]

We really should not allow people to go from middle school to high school without passing basic civics.

1) The Legislative Branch the law.
2) The Executive Branch the law.
3) The Judicial Branch the law.

Clearly, many commenters can not fill in the blanks correctly.



And they still get to vote.

[JasonPickett-jx]

Saagar, Congress can pass more than aid for Ukraine and Israel. Think of their pay raises! Bipartisanship at its finest.

[joelcraig]

So, Congress will have to start doing its job.

[jaywhite]

So corporations can just finance and divide both side so nothing is done legislatively and do whatever they want?... whats the news again?

[japace]

So does that mean if any corporation received a "cease and desist" letter, they don't have to comply until the federal court says so?

[mikahundin]

The current federal judiciary system is already facing challenges with backlog and delays in case processing. The addition of numerous administrative law cases could exacerbate these issues. Judges, who are generalists and not always experts in the technical fields regulated by agencies, may find it challenging to handle the increased complexity and volume of cases efficiently​.

[BigDongWong]

I remember learning how great food processors were back in the late 1800's/early 1900's before the FDA was a thing...

[cattibingo]

Toxic runoff makes the water taste better anyway

[papasquat]

Agencies role is to enforce laws passed by congress, NOT to create laws on their own. That's not how this was designed.

[tammyschilling]

I totally agree with you, Sagar, about these cases. The Hill meanwhile is calling this a win for free speech, if you can believe it.

[NVS]

This isn't a 'big government' thing. The simple fact is that lawmarkers do not have the expertise or background of how these agencies work to effective write regulations. Instead they write laws and leave it to the agencies, who are the experts on this stuff, to regulate as Congress mandates. The Supreme Court basically gave lobbyists unlimited control in how these agencies work, which is asinine. There is clearly overreach involved but that can easily be corrected by Congress but as Saagar said, Congress hasn't done shit for 30 years. The Supreme Court's approach is just burning down the country and starting over apparently.

[Joe-qowb]

I don't mind the concept. But my guess is since Congress is bought and owned by big business and special interest I see it causing more harm than good. I hope to be wrong.

[PeterSierra]

Where are you guys with presidential immunity. At what point will you do even “reporting”?

[VDarksteel]

Good breakdown on the pros and cons of this. I've only heard the pros.

[ryanra]

So judges are supposed to be experts and we are supposed to ignore the actual experts in these fields? That makes sense

[jonwalter]

I'm really enjoying Krystal's input today. She's much less annoying today.