How a fishing dispute could disrupt federal regulators
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- The Supreme Court will hear a pair of cases that could lead the justices to overturn the 40-year-old Chevron doctrine that directs courts to defer to federal agency experts. Read more: wapo.st/3S0BMFJ. Subscribe to The Washington Post on UA-cam: wapo.st/2QOdcqK
Follow us:
Twitter: / washingtonpost
Instagram: / washingtonpost
Facebook: / washingtonpost
I hope the fishermen win. Chevron deference should have NEVER been acceptable.
The question is "Who defines what reasonable is"?
The Supreme Court
@@benmills9693 It should be the People. For the People, by the People...
When it comes to the environment scientists should define what the reasonable action is, because they understand the data on the population levels of the species involved. They are the ones who are preventing extinctions, not politicians.
And the more species that go extinct the closer we are to going extinct.
Sounds like a good thing... why should unelected people be able to enact some rule which could subject a citizen to criminal penalties?
Because the USA Congress and Senate cannot pass anything other than budgets. The Senate blocks everything sine 60 votes are needed when it is not a budget.
The elected officials are not scientists, these are administrations that employ actual freaking scientists.
This is all bullshit, NOAA monitors population levels to prevent extinction, and those who fish more get charges for a part of the conservation just like how hunters pay for hunting licensing. Scientists and the government pays for the population level monitoring in the wild.
Cases like this and Sackett V EPA frame the argument as the little man getting shafted when what it really is is a strategy of fat cat Wall Street lobbyists like the lobbyists that defended the Sacketts in court (who they were in contact with before they bought the house. It was all set up) to create legal precedent to weaken federal regulators like the Environmental Protection Agency, NOAA and Securities and Exchange Commission so the fat cats can run amuck.
The strategy to destroy environmental regulatory bodies frames it as an executive authority issue, but that is simply because the Environmental Protection Agency is under Department of Interior and NOAA is under Department of Commerce. This is all a bullshit tactic to weaken environmental regulators just like how the rigged SCOTUS in Sackett V EPA ruled that HALF of America's wetlands were no longer considered wetlands legally and therefore had no more federal protection.
It is a scheme to let the rich destroy the world you live in. Don't fall for it.
Because the Congress won't do their job and include the details in the legislation they pass (the "laws") with enough detail to actually define what the legislation requires. Right now they let the agencies under the control of the President do that, then when something goes wrong they can blame the President for the problem and let the final decision on how to implement the legislation be determined by the Federal court system (all the way up to the Supreme Court if need be).
In this case the argument is basicly fishermen are punished and fined for cooperating with the vague arbitrary law and further punished if they dont. The wording of laws must be made clear to intentions and avenues for it to be made law. If our representatives fail to do this they are wasting time and not passing law. they are handing their jobs to unelected unacountable Bureaucrats who abuse the Constitution's very meaning under these unjust laws.
Yes, please!! Overturn Chevron.
Good the usda should be next the are imposing laws and fees that destroys farmers and i requested a printed copy of the animal welfare act but no they wont sent me one unless i buy a usda license ,that tells me its all about the money not welfare of animals
This must scare Congress, it'll mean they'll have to work on writing more detailed legislation. They'll have to stay in Washington DC and determine the legislation's details, not pass a vague law then let the various agencies controlled by the Executive branch (the President) fill in the details which they can then blame on the President when something goes wrong.
Its not just supported by conservatives. It's supported by anyone who lives under a suppressive government..and who is endowed with commin sense
Chevron Deference, Is an abuse of power. Those perpetrating that abuse should be jailed.
Federal government shouldn’t have any natural regulations on anything..these things can be handled by state conservation …it would be more efficient anyways as the state will have better understanding of the game and wildlife than the Feds who could be hundreds if not a thousand miles away
I support the lawsuit Feds have 2 much broad power that they don’t need and they do abuse daily
That is the entire strategy, to weaken the power of the union because the states are easier to corrupt individually.
NOAA monitors population levels to prevent extinction, and those who fish more get charges for a part of the conservation just like how hunters pay for hunting licensing. Scientists and the government pays for the population level monitoring in the wild.
Cases like this and Sackett V EPA frame the argument as the little man getting shafted when what it really is is a strategy of fat cat Wall Street lobbyists like the lobbyists that defended the Sacketts in court (who they were in contact with before they bought the house. It was all set up) to create legal precedent to weaken federal regulators like the Environmental Protection Agency, NOAA and Securities and Exchange Commission so the fat cats can run amuck.
The strategy to destroy environmental regulatory bodies frames it as an executive authority issue, but that is simply because the Environmental Protection Agency is under Department of Interior and NOAA is under Department of Commerce. This is all a bullshit tactic to weaken environmental regulators just like how the rigged SCOTUS in Sackett V EPA ruled that HALF of America's wetlands were no longer considered wetlands legally and therefore had no more federal protection.
It is a scheme to let the rich destroy the world you live in. Don't fall for it.
Hope the fishermen win.... Power to the People.
Giving unelected agencies power is not constitutional. If it isnt in the constitution it just isnt enforceable. This is agency overreach. Sure they might have reason to inspect, bit the cost should be on the inspecting agent.
😂 really? The Executive Office power to have administrations is not constitutional? 😂
So the peoples government gobbles up, and too bad we dont get any unless the carrot is followed?
America is falling apart at the seams and the supreme court is dealing with fish, REALLY, we are screwed.
with idiots like you of course the country is screwed.
Yes, you got it right! Something fishy going one in this communist regime of Biden.
There not dealing with fish There dealing with a bogus law that should have been removed years ago
@@jimcox7232 But we are being invaded by millions of illegal immigrants, that seems a little more important than fish, it just shows me none of them care about you and me.
Falling apart but they are putting it back together. We need to fix these issues.
The Clean Air Act 1977, unsurprisingly was introduced, and passed 48 to 24 by Democrats. Overtly Oppressive to the average Joe.
Signed into law by Nixon.
It is an intentional lie to make this about the average person.
NOAA monitors population levels to prevent extinction, and those who fish more get charges for a part of the conservation just like how hunters pay for hunting licensing. Scientists and the government pays for the population level monitoring in the wild.
Cases like this and Sackett V EPA frame the argument as the little man getting shafted when what it really is is a strategy of fat cat Wall Street lobbyists like the lobbyists that defended the Sacketts in court (who they were in contact with before they bought the house. It was all set up) to create legal precedent to weaken federal regulators like the Environmental Protection Agency, NOAA and Securities and Exchange Commission so the fat cats can run amuck.
The strategy to destroy environmental regulatory bodies frames it as an executive authority issue, but that is simply because the Environmental Protection Agency is under Department of Interior and NOAA is under Department of Commerce. This is all a bullshit tactic to weaken environmental regulators just like how the rigged SCOTUS in Sackett V EPA ruled that HALF of America's wetlands were no longer considered wetlands legally and therefore had no more federal protection.
It is a scheme to let the rich destroy the world you live in. Don't fall for it.
Why is it called Chevron?
Crooked cush jobs.
Not disrupt but curtail!
About time the commercial fisheries start dealing with what civilians have been. I have zero sympathy for an industry that has destroyed the ability for joe shmoe to enjoy fishing off the shore.
😂 ok bud
People do not realize how bad things can and will get if the supreme court knots down these Agencies and the Federal Govt scope
We have too many federal agencies dictating the power we have over our own lives. Everyone calls Trump a dictator, but giving Federal agencies the power to dictate even small aspects of our lives is even scarier. Most federal agencies are based in Washington DC and agency leaders have very little perspective of how their "rules" effect people in other parts of the nation. What is good for the big cities isn't always right for small communities. The federal government was never meant to be so big or powerful.
All these fishermen who hate the government oversight of their industry.... well then remove the government regulators and then watch as China, Japan, and all the other giant fishing countries come in and take all their fish because there are no regulators.
No bias in this reporting….😮 This is why we can’t trust the lame stream media