Supreme Court 'Dealt The American People A Blow' By Killing Chevron Doctrine: Democracy Forward CEO
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 вер 2024
- On "Forbes Newsroom," Democracy Forward CEO Skye Perryman responded to the Supreme Court ending the Chevron Doctrine.
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
account.forbes...
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: / forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: / forbes
More From Forbes: forbes.com
Ah, thank you for the gaslighting 101 class...
Chevron DEFERENCE is unelected idiots telling you to abide by unconstitutional rules they just make up as they go... Let's use the ATF as an example: the head of the ATF, Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, Mr Dettlebach doesn't even know the difference between a clip & a magazine... He's clueless to the very items he's supposed to regulate, so now there's a woman in Arkansas without her husband because the ATF made up rules, and did a no knock warrant at 5am and they blew his brains out because he was defending his home from invaders... He'd been the Clinton International airport COO for 32 years.
The ATF murdered him....
That's the danger of Chevron.
Mental. Acrobatics.
Jesus Christ, that's a Hell of a way to go.
That’s the first example I thought of. ATF abuses their power. EPA is another example.
@@grey5751That's what it takes to be an ATF prosecutor
Anybody else notice the airport he was in charge of for many years is Mena Airport?…if you know the name Berry Seal and have heard about the cocaine smuggling operation run by the CIA which led to the Iran/ Contra scandal then you know what went down there behind closed doors.
Point being this guy had been privy to some really dark sh*t throughout his career and all during Bill Clinton's tenure as the Governor... Anyone ever heard the term "Clinton Body Count"?... Just saying
The ruling undermined the administrative state's ability to take away people's freedom, not give it to them. You seem confused.
Funny how the "40 years of precedence" keeps being brought up like that was a long time ago or something. 40 years ago was 1984. That means the government went about 200 years without the Chevon deference.
Well, things changed over a couple of hundred years. Technology occured. In fact, since 1984 America has added 100 million people to the population. STEM began to flourish. Prolific knowledge greatly out-pased the awareness of your basic politician. Common sense deduced that teams of nonpolitical experts were worth being part of the decision process. But fascists hate that truth.
She is not confused. She simply does not care about freedom. She does not care about rights. She cares about government being enabled to force the submission of the people to whatever governmental policy is in vogue because she expects that she and her political allies will be the ones directing those government policies. And she doesn't want Cletus the Slack-Jawed Yokel to be able to block those policies on the "technicality" of their unconstitutionality.
@@situational.analysis That argument doesn't hold an ounce of water. Population has nothing to do with enforcing Constitutional principles. Fascism is authoritarian and dictatorial in nature...taking that authoritative ability away from unelected radical bureaucrats is actually the opposite of fascism. Send it back to the legislators where it belongs. The "experts" (like the people who predicted an ice age in 1970) can certainly make recommendations and advise lawmakers, but laws need to be passed by the legislative branch which consists of democratically elected representatives operating within the constraints of the Constitution.
@@situational.analysissmd
@nickspeakstruth133 That you can't write a cogent sentence defending your dissenting opinion just confirms both your obtuseness and my accuracy. That's ok. I already knew I'm much, much smarter.
This was an awesome ruling as it took unconstitutional power away from crappy bureaucrats.
until you’re negatively impacted a lot of dummy’s will think this way
Forbes is a chinese owned company.
@@mustbtroublethe EPA has done a lot of negative.
@@mustbtrouble Until YOU are negatively impacted. This is called argument from anecdote.
@@mustbtrouble Yea well..., atleast we're not the 'dummies' that need day care... and a baby sitter to decide for us what we should eat.
I think you got it backwards. The Supreme Court dealt the government a blow.
If a meat inspector sees gangrene, the inspector can no longer condemn that meat - there must now be a full blown trial, with pretrial motions, hearings, lawyers and judges, depositions, etc. is this progress?
I kinda want meat inspectors to act when they find gangrene.
Well said
@@henrybutchy3242 More gaslighting, the Federal government meat inspector can contact state and local government inspectors, you have other branches of government like state and local that have inspector’s that can stop the distribution of the meat, then the federal government takes them to court if they need to be taken to court.
@@henrybutchy3242that is the biggest strawman I've seen in a while. The decision doesn't take away the ability for an agency to do its job. It takes away the ability to make up new rules and interpretation from nothing. Stop making up lies.
@@henrybutchy3242 you really shouldn't say things when you have no idea what you are talking about!
OH NO!!! UNELECTED THIEVES CANT MAKE LEGISLATION 😢😢😢
I know right. Say it ain't so!
Corporate lobbies that put shareholder profits above human interest get to do so instead. Oh joy.
@@northside4767why would you think a bunch of do nothing bureaucrats looking for their big payday in industry would give that up for the citizens whom they despise
@@northside4767, How does requiring a court decision have anything to do with lobbyists or corporations?
@mikemorgan8588: Wow. You're new to this whole "life" thing, aren't you?
Small businesses are happy it was overturned not upset.
Congress passes laws. Not the EPA, not the ATF, etc.
Congress passes laws and the court interprets those laws, the president is supposed to execute those laws... your exactly right!
This is a good thing and a major win for the people
For those who know nothing about EPA, FDA and other regulatory agencies, they are rules . And Congress wouldn't know the difference between a fish and a frying pan in a scientific technical discussion. They can't even pass an Appropriations Bill. When judges and Congress are all expert scientists in the vast array of drugs regulation, clinical trials, statistical science, environmental science, etc., let me know.
@@cecilelaforce3686 this
@@cecilelaforce3686 they don't have to be experts, and that is where this decision is taking us: that the Judicial and Legislative branch can now dictate how the Executive branch shall do its job. Well intentioned public service for the good of the American people isn't a thing anymore, it's all about whom is in control and how they can corrupt the system for their advantage.
@@cecilelaforce3686 How did science work out for you on Covid? Science told you that red meat was bad. "Trust the science" is for fools
Chevron had allowed the executive branch to work around Congress, adjusting regulations without a vote. Chevron violated the separation of powers. Only the legislative branch can make laws/regulations.
Boom. Exactly right.
Yep!
This was evidently lost on the woman in the interview.
@@stewhobson9748 Doubtful. More than likely she resents having to get her agenda past a multipartisan congress before she gets to impose it on the American taxpayers for her own personal benefit.
Legislation would be nice. Not much happening on that front these days.
The constitution says that the judiciary will interpret ALL LAWS. Live with it.
@doneyandassociates correct! It also states the two other branches are to work as checks to them as well. Funny there are no ethics rules for the highest court of the country haha.
I have no idea how I will be able to live my life with less government overreach.
LOL
Do not worry they will soon mandate that you have a live-in government advisor to help you out.
@@armastat From Iran.
Much more Relaxed!
Happily.
The Chevron decision gave Americans more freedom and less government. Unelected people making rules without congress and senate making laws is not the American way. Supreme court made the right ruling. It is unsettling that it wasnt 9-0
I think it would have been more unsettling if it had been 9-0.. if the democrat judges had actually voted for what was good for the american people, I'd know something was up.
@@djmccullough9233very true
Chevron is the old decision that was reversed btw. But I know what you mean. 👍
Yeah the freedom to poison our water supply and pollute our air.
I thought that’s what I heard.
I beg to differ , the court is doing exactly what they should to do . follow the constitution. And protect us from a corrupt government !! 🇺🇸💪
The Just-us *are* the corrupt government taking bribes in order to rule in favor of corporations
How is it a blow to the people when the bureaucratic state lost power to rule without consequences!
Read "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair to appreciate the benefits of a powerless bureaucratic state.
@nukembear2345 they don’t “rule”, they set health and safety standards.
@beehappyalways correct the line that made the milk industry what it is now and now mercing Americans left and right with what's put in it. Not to mention, the Supreme Court is appointed not elected to interpret the laws.
Bc it’s the government who protects the people. 6 unelected republican justices serving lifetime appts who r in the pockets of conservative elites and corporate shareholders.
@@beehappyalways well when a bureaucrat decides that you will get 20 years in prison for owning an item that was completely legal for the last 20 years I think you have a problem.
What University did she attend? Because, it did not teach the U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights & American Civics.
Where do they find these people with useless rhetoric opinions. I agree kinda pathetic
She's a leftist. Constitution doesn't mean anything to her.
@@cindydufala7646 finally a stand against marxist indoctrination via university brainwashing. The Dunning-Krueger association. Sorry but no cheese with that whine!
Any one of the "elite" colleges. Take your pick.
Actually it’s just about any college and public school in the United States.
Congress can enlist subject matter experts too. Her take is false. The issue is not enforcement, it is Congress doing a proper and Constitutional job.
TOTALLY DISAGREE. Chevron deference created huge problems and bypassed the structures the constitution created. Special interests has been abusing it in their favor for decades. The court opinion from Roberts explains the issues, look it up to know the real story. Huge win for the people!!
The bottom line is a huge win for 'we the peopje' .
Notice how she never really discussed the basis for the ruling. She is just a PO'd socialist. This really is a big win for America.
Big Pharma and FDA a prime example...
Yep
That was my thought. But I’m just an RN. 😉😇
Why should bureaucrats with no accountability be given the right to enact rules that tread on the rights of citizens. The Supreme Court got it right.
Corporations aren’t citizens, they are for profit companies. They will poison you to make more money. That’s why we have the epa. 🤯🤯
The supreme Court is unelected and unable to be held accountable
Agreed
It's them giving them selves the right. You can also vote to give yourself the right. It's called yes or no in an interaction backed by willingness and readyness to enact force soon an aggressor
Agreed!!!
No unelected bureaucrat should have the authority to interpret the law or create rules that carry the weight of law.
you're like hardcore anti judge? wild
@@satec77 I see what you did there. Justices are provided for in the constitution. Bureaucrats are not.
Imagine calling your company "Democracy Forward" and then getting upset that unelected bureaucrats can't make arbitrary laws. You can't make this stuff up.
Pretty sure they're practicing doublespeak for the ongoing 1984 transition.
I'm sure she gets a hefty paycheck in those 9000 page continuing resolutions as an unnamed NGO
"Democracy" is the codeword Marxists use to push communism
Misnomer. Very much like the so-called inflation reduction act.
Purposeful, Dem strategy to fool their lol info, voters.
Mr Tyler..... everything they title is named the opposite of what it actually does. social media. The cares act... are examples.
This is a WIN for the PEOPLE.
Amen, All Chevron Deference did was guarantee any Government entity,were going to get away with whatever Crimes, they've committed against anyone
Scotus has Finally made a Perfect Decision
How is unelected people making decision for us a Win?
@@salvyballacc you forget that elected people appoint the Supreme Court. Oh wait you know that and your gaslighting us.
@@salvyballacc I think you misunderstood what he said
@@AetherialDreamsOfficial I said Unelected
Chevron being overturned is positive. Especially for illegal ATF decisions. This is a good decision all around. Not just for gun rights.
I love the sweet tears of these socialists crying about losing their tyrannical power.
This encompasses all administrative agencies, not just the ATF.
The difference is that she believes that the government bureaucrats have the peoples best interests in mind. Now, the tie goes to the freedom of the individual, not the interests of the government agency. Bureaucrats seldom have the individual citizens freedom in mind, but instead their own self sustaining power.
They're just mad they can't force feed us their agenda anymore.
Absolutely nailed it! 🎯🎯💯👍
Yes!
I absolutely trust corporations to have the best interests of the individual in mind.
@@omicron2018 your sarcasm font isn’t working. But in still understand. Corporations are accountable to the consumer and their suppliers. Bureaucrats are accountable to nobody, and we’re not elected. So they have no place making rules and imposing fines. Corporations are not ideal, but they can be held accountable.
lol Propaganda at its best.
Yes, no substance, all opinion slanted in one political direction, in lock step with 95% of the major media.
They're crazy!! They made fisherman pay $700 a day so government auditors could sit on the boat and watch them! 🙄🙄🤡🤡
Not crazy, corrupt.
While giving billions freely to Ukraine instead of supporting American fishermen simply trying to make a living.
This was a great ruling. It means the gov can't twist laws to their will just to go after someone.
It means the legislative branch may actually need to do their job and pass laws that are specific and can't leave gray areas.
100%. People on both sides of the aisle should be upset at the amount of tax money, special interest money, and insider trading being done by their congresspeople only for them to barely pass a budget with every other issue stapled on via quid pro quo favors.
Congress needs to figure it out and get functional again or get replaced.
You can tell how important it is for Chevron deference to get struck down because of how they are freaking out since the supreme Court took it away
Exactly! 👉👃
Absolutely massive win because they are massively melting down. Reddit is full if 2025 blueanon conspiracy theories right now LOL
@@jurpo6 Which, to be honest, actually sounds pretty good...
One big reason is that the DEA can't say drugs are illegal because they say so anymore.
Now, a lawsuit can bring in a medical doctor and scientist into court that say an illegal drug has a medical benefit.
Previously, the Judge would say science has no meaning because the DEA has the final say under Chevron.
Now, the judge has to listen to the experts instead of the DEA. This is going to effectively end the War on Drugs by giving power back to the States.
Upside down, inside out, and backwards; government is not the people.
😂😂😂 taking power away from the government is ALWAYS better for the American people
@dasjuggernaut1 taken by a group appointed not elected interpreting law based in a lot of times with religious beliefs. Not a good thing at all lll
The US existed for 200 years BEFORE Chevron, and Chevron has existed for less than 50 years. It's the right move.
And what was food safety like for people in those previous 200 years? What was workplace safety like? What was drinking water like? What was air pollution like? Who looked out for people when they were taking advantage of a huge financial organizations?
@@craig8638 Only Congress can make laws and regulations, not some unelected agency.
@@craig8638 Cook your steaks well-done and thoroughly wash your fruits and vegetables. Oh, and stop whining.
@@craig8638Most of those categories, mostly better.
Food, for instance. You grew it, raised, slaughtered it, reaped it, or traded neighbors for it. Because it was in your control, you knew what went it and what didn't.
No plastics. No forever chemicals. No dyes. No extra hormones. No Genetical Modified plants. No human made meats. No "artificial" inside the packaging. In short, healthier.
And people have gone generations with an EPA or FDA to tell them to be on the lookout for argot poisoning. Or mold. Today those organizations would tell you the fake and man made meatsare healthy, that chemicals everywhere are better than natural, or that sugar cereal is somehow healthier than eggs and red meat.
@@craig8638food all across the world is made by the same brands but we have completely different, very unhealthy ingredients.
Anything that takes power away from unelected bureaucrats I'm on board with. Maybe they should not have gone so drunk with power the last few years. Now they have to answer for their actions.
Not a blow to American. A huge WIN for Americans.
Exactly
This woman is obviously Pro government overreach and anti freedom.
Why do liberals want the federal government to have total control
So you won’t mind lead pipes and asbestos in your children’s world? You have no idea where this will lead. This is the biggest LOSS for Americans. Be careful, now you won’t know what’s in the cereal you’re serving for breakfast.
No a failure
"WE THE PEOPLE", not the federal agencies. You just sad cause you lost power.😢
You are pro the super rich and the powerful companies being able to do whatever they want to do nearly unchecked even if their actions harm the public......not sure I'd be celebrating that if I were you.....
Wow. Again, I see how the education system has failed. Seriously, you are putting your welfare to the whims of the courts with the companies hiring their lawyers. Welcome to your dystopian existence.
@@Jsee66 Just one step closer to enacting project 2025...consolidation of power into the elected president (in this case, trump), get rid of FBI, CIA, etc. is next. Weird move for the long run, as having everything run through the judicial branch until the power consolidation occurs in the executive...one thing trump will not need anymore is a supreme court.
We’ve got some water we saved special just for you.
@@Jsee66 Agencies never should have had the power to do what Congress was given the power to do. Which is make the laws !!
This lady is coming off very liberal. Last time I checked, unelected officials shouldn’t be making elected official decisions.
Oh, no. The electeds are actually going to have to be specific on their laws, and not intentionally vague so bureaucrats can't just make up something to fit what they want. How terrible for t̶h̶e̶ g̶o̶v̶e̶r̶n̶m̶e̶n̶t̶ the people.
Nailed it.
One major takeaway I got from this is the court was trying to stop bureaucrats like the ones in the ATF from suddenly deciding chunks of my pistol or rifle makes me a felon without a law being passed in Congress. They're trying to stop bureaucratic overreach, which is a good thing.
Never once did she address the Constitutional issue before the court. She viewed the ruling from the perspective of the federal government now not being able to do what they think is best for us with no accountability. This is a huge victory over an overly powerful authoritarian bureaucracy which had assumed powers never granted by the Constitution. Their history of legislation by bureaucratic fiat bypassed Congress and was also used to weaponize their power against dissenters and political opponents of the executive branch. This is a major victory for smaller, less intrusive government and the American people.
Yes. Her attitude shows me that she does not even belong in this country. Perhaps the EU would be more to her liking.
Leftists believe that their Ends ALWAYS justify ANY means.
Defund the federal government
That's easy. Everyone quit paying taxes
We did fine for the first 140 years without federal taxes.
This decision is Good for the American pepple, NOT the beaucrats
It's a huge win! America got a sliver of it's freedom back.❤
This decision was great for We the People. The Founders didn’t intend for unelected bureaucrats in the 3 letter agencies to make laws- EPA, ATF, IRS, etc. More to Cuba or N Korea if you want to be controlled.
Can we put CSE in there? They are killing me fr
Yes they did..if not nothing will get done and everything will bog down in court. It’s away for people who do not like certain laws to challenge them indefinitely. We the corporations you mean. GTH.
Big business will fight everything. In court Little can’t afford to fight that way. Loses
@@cs292 they absolutely did not. They would abolish all those agencies.
@@cs292 In that event then Congress can modify the law to include what they want it to be. Not some unelected agency. The way it was allowed the executive branch to bypass congress.
It's about time to reel in the agencies
Getting the sense this is setting the stage for a Javier Milei-esque policy change by Trump, to help pay off the national debt just like Javier. But I could be wrong.
How the hell is that decision a blow to the American people? This is a win!
Hooray, a return to lead gasoline… you are insane if you think this is a positive
They’re puppets of the give the hive does agree.
@@daryno9048 govern me harder daddy
@@daryno9048 if i understand correctly it is the opposite of that
@@P4NxC4K3what is wrong with you ppl? What do you think the government is there for? Why do you want more poisons in everything you come in contact with?
SCOTUS got it Right 👊🔥Bravo 🙌 Great Job 👏 Very intelligent ruling 🙏🤍🕊️⚖️🗽🦅🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
Completely the opposite. This ruling keeps non-elected agencies from creating regulations on the People without going thru Congress vs their own interpretations.
Bs! The heads of these agencies APPOINTED.
@@bizygirl1 Appointed - and those they hire - aren’t Elected and many stay there decades long.
@@rickstokes2239 Of course they do. They’re subject matter experts in their fields. Their scientists, doctors, biologists, attorneys, public health experts, IT professionals, etc. who’ve spent years studying and working in their departments knowing the ins and outs of laws, policies, treaties, data, studies. They have knowledge and Trump wants to throw them out. They’ll get replaced with people beholden to Trump who don’t know crap. The ripple effects will be insurmountable. Lawsuits, deregulation, safety hazards, catastrophic accidents, and huge losses to the people of this country in health, finance, work safety, job protection, child labor laws, housing, consumer affairs, on and on.
@@bizygirl1Being "appointed" doesn't mean they are right for the job, or even capable. How many got the positions they are in because of who they know, not what they know? It's common practice, especially in government work.
Hopefully we get new better people in congress
Great decision by SCOTUS. Good for the American people
This was a massive win for the American people!
She is clueless.
She is working for Deep state communists!!!!
Liberals, deep state puppet
No, she's angry that her precious Administrative.State.was (partially) neutered.
She's a well paid shill for the padded admin state. And fears the federal pig trough may be drying up.
She is perfect for Communist Cuba.
She couldn't be more wrong
She must make a lot of money off these non-elected dictators
I think it is more of since it was decided by judges who Trump appointed (ignoring that 6 of the 9 of them were not) that they have to be against it. and then they do mental gymnastics to somehow justify their position, even if it doesn't make sense. This is their mental illness - they have no ability to discriminate between logical and illogical.
Looks like she's an Administrative Law attorney. Her income might be threatened if it's harder for un-elected administrative bureaucrats to make their own laws.
She is probably just another leftist who left true religion to make govt her god. We all have to worship something.
Alphabet Agencies have been sticking it to the people for 100 plus years. This is a win for the American people!
Now a random judge and private companies will self-rule on what's safe for you. Congrats!
Have fun trusting Boeing next time you take a plane trip.
Yeah because boing was doing such a great job 🙄@@OmnipotentO
@@OmnipotentOBwahaha, we can't trust them now!
Could not agree more HVAC guy. I trust private citizens a hell of a lot more than government.
@@wolfgang1496 if you thought that was bad just you wait lol
With this new ruling they now they have nothing to worry about. its about to get 100x worse.
I work in a hospital lab and the FDA is literally what keeps things like blood banking and transfusion practices safe.
This only limits those that the American people never elected. Give more power back to the people and it helps limit government spending which is obviously needed
Absolutely! It should reduce the needed unelected swamp creatures needed to rip off America.
If our Federal system was actually trying to deliver for people then I would agree. But that is FAR from the case. For one, the SEC and most others are not for the people
How would you ever agree with dictatorial regulations, not based on any law?
Quite the opposite, We are a Nation of Laws, not Rules. Frankly screw the bureaucratic state, they are not supposed to make decisions. If Congress can't write a clear law, maybe the law shouldn't exist.
Unelected officials were never supposed to make laws and regulations. Simply enforce the ones the legislators make. If they require clarification on how to enforce, they should request the legislators to do so. It is their job.
What's sad is that the SCOTUS must waste their time on garbage like this, which is strictly unelected officials giving themselfs more and more power, which our Constitution does not give them!
It's always interpret, then enforce.
You forgot the thinking part of the process.
Well, we can see why you shouldn't have the job. LOL!
@ywtcc no, executive does not interpret. It is simply to do. If there are questions, go back to those that wrote it. If the agencies have further concerns about constitutionality of said legislation, that's where the judicial interprets legislative intent vis a vi the USC.
But therein lies the problem when they got that little bit of power it went to their heads and then they thought that they could just start making laws and taking over and hold people accountable while they're not
@@Kainis80 If you don't interpret, then you don't attach meanings to words.
Even machines need to interpret languages.
And that's a machine language, that's greatly simplified!
English is much worse to mechanize - the words don't even necessarily have one meaning associated with them.
Regardless, you're definitely not understanding the law if you're not interpreting it.
You're just bad with language and kidding yourself.
Also, you're refusing to tell me how you're interpreting the language, and you're hiding your intentions by doing so.
You need some self awareness, and some more honesty in your arguments.
Also, you really need to just listen to the smart people, sometimes. It shows real immaturity to fail to do so.
Reducing government regulation by the executive branch is a blessing to the American people!,
These people in this video are out of their mind. The Chevron doctrine was nothing but a free pass for non legislative entities to dictate what they wanted without going through the proper legislative process.
Bullseye!
Wrong. The legislative process is (and has been since 1946) the Administrative Procedures Act. Such as, from several tickets, you accumulate enough points fir a suspensiin. The suspensionbis not automatic, the APA requires notice and a hearing. The hearing is at the MVA, and it is limited to (1) was it you, (2) was it X points. Now, no more administrative hearings - it all goes before local court judges. Pretrial procedure, depositions, motions, hearings, lawyers.
It is soooo stupid. Take America Back to 1932!
There is no legislative process now! How is that a good thing?? Seriously?
@@carolnelson8459 That is why we have CONGRESS! Seriously?
@@henrybutchy3242How is it taking America back to 1932 with SCOTUS overturning a decision made in 1984?
You are wrong. Unelected people should not be making law.
Are you kidding! Overturning Chevron Deference is the best thing that's happened to the American people since they initiated it 40 years ago.
Good. Less regulations
Chevron ended up being a power grab that was stripped away .Good
Can't believe she actually said that.
If by "the people," you mean the bloated federal bureaucracy, yeah, you got slapped....
Very well put!
The Supeme Court followed the Constitution!! A win for the Republic!!
Well Said!!
All I can say is right on. Nailed it!
You need to read it. Chevron is going to pollute our environment
Amen.
Yes not sure why so many are triggered that scotus is doing their job as they should
To summarize what she said; "um, um, uh, um, um, uh, um, um, um, uh uh, um, which um, um, um"
No small business wants a federal bureaucracy to be able to fine them at will without due process of law. The Supreme Court got this one right.
Small business and farms are being ruined by monopolies that will benefit from this decision.
@@craig8638 Small businesse and farms now have the due process and protection of law that they should have always had when being attacked by overreaching federal bureaucracies. Chevrons benefit nobody but the bureaucracies utilizing them.
@@kraftzion So small business’ and farms aren’t being put out of business by monopolies?
@@craig8638 Sure they are. One of the ways is by paying bribes to federal bureaucracies to use chevrons to exert pressure and take money through fines.
@@craig8638 Not relevant to this. In this case, the agency did not have the budget to do the level of regulation the agency aspired to do and also pay staff. So the agency set up a billing department and sent out invoices to the businesses they regulated to fund their budget... Unreal tyranny.
Chevron doctrine should never have been enacted.
Yeah I totally want to be able to set my tap water on fire and let corporations run the show. Air isn’t that big of a deal anyway.
Just like Roe
@@mariner1952yeah I totally want OSHA mandating experimental gene therapies.
@@jeffcook2570 ? Yeah they don’t do that, they haven’t included cell and gene therapy agents to the hazardous drug list. Do you want people to be exposed to hazardous materials? Because this could be a possibility now….
@mariner1952 the "vaccine" is a gene therapy that they already tried to mandate but thanks for playing.
A blow to us the people.... WTF please move to Canada!!!!!
It did not make it harder for government to "deliver for people" it made it harder for unelected officials to act like feudal lords.
This was the only constitutionally correct interpretation they could have come to. Y'all need to stop with the gaslighting.
Your ignorance is showing. Take your wokeness somewhere else.😊
Congress makes the laws not nameless faceless bureaucrats.
According to these 2 geniuses it’s the other way around. Sadly congress is more like these fools than not. They just want to throw out a hollow suggestion and let the back room dealers of what ever in charge party sort it out. Unfortunately the “it” in that sentence is our freedoms and lives.
@@geoffwidmier3714 Supreme Court doesn't write laws. Go back to civics class.
@@williemurray2523 They aren't writing the law, but they are legislating from the bench by making decisions that set precedence. This has long been a part of western law, and is not a thing one side or the other does more of. It's just the fact that a ruling sets a precedent other lawyers will point to for interpretation later.
Your congress works for corporations and makes laws that benefit corporations only. Regulating what corporations can and cannot do benefits the people, but you been brainwashed to think that regulating corporations is attack on your personal freedom.
Yeah, we need more unelected/unaccountable government running our lives.
They are clearly accountable to congress.
She said that they overturned 40 years of precedent but failed to mention that 40 years ago the court overturned 210 years of precedent. The American people won.
@@TSlick2 no they aren’t. Congress can hold hearings and expose them but nothing else.
@@TSlick2
Now they are.
@@andrewgrey1930 No. They were before. That oversight has been removed and replaced by unelected judges.
Back door agencies don’t have the power to make “rules” for us to follow
Federal agencies have had too much authority to write laws that congress has not debated or passed. This is a good move and puts control back in the hands of the people. The last 40 years brought us overburdened regulation to the point that small businesses cannot function without a host of lawyers discovering and interpreting the myriad of regulations on business. As a result, small business have the choice of either doing the best they can and hoping they don’t violate some obscure law or regulation, or deciding it isn’t worth the risk of going into business because they can’t afford the lawyers needed to legally operate.
So big corps essentially wrote laws with limited restrictions to ensure little to no competition??? Did i get that right
Wow she is a fool
Or demmycraps?
DEI hire?
Her and AOC must've been roommates
Probably will lose her job with many others that liked these agencies making up Un-Constitutional laws.
Bring on the chaos of no longer allowing unelected bureaucrats to tell me how to live my life!😂
I disagree. Fed government is not our daddy. We get to have the right to sue these people. The govt protects them from us suing them. Happy they are free for us to reach now. Perfect.
Actually what it did was stop over regulation without recourse to a fair hearing of grievances by out of control bureaucrats.
You do understand now that people that were not elected as representatives to the American citizen can no longer make rulings laws telling people about their land about people just about everything. Every department in the federal government just simply made rules, and then we all had to follow them we didn’t like these people we don’t even know what the rules are based on now Congress and senate will have to make all law, this is a good thing not a bad thing
lol what do they mean by the American”people”?
lol when has the idea of “providing for the people” ever been a goal of the federal government?
lol when has the idea of "providing for the people" ever been a goal of the giant, for profit corporations?
@@KennethHill-fo6nc hmmmm....where do you get your food 🤔
@@ladydi4537 From the grocery store as I assume you and most Americans do. Not sure what you are trying to get at with that question. The point I was trying to make is that the scientific experts will no longer be allowed to determine what pesticides should or should not be sprayed on our food because those decisions will be left up to clueless and unqualified legislators like MTG, Ted Cruz, and Tommy “I can’t correctly name the three branches of the Federal Government.” Tuberville.
@@KennethHill-fo6nc if you add Schumer, Nadler, Pelosi ("have to pass it before you can read it") AOC, Bush, Omar, etal the Squad, Newsome, & Fauci I may agree with you.
Legislators bring in experts to craft laws.
Bureaucrats making Rules are NOT laws.
Get most of my food from the ranch. Beef, chickens, pork , apples, apricots, grapes etc & veggies. Also from locally grown organic farmers.
Chevron pretty much makes laws on their own as unelected bureaucrats
This is actually a great ruling by the Court
She said so many words, yet no explanation as to how this decision threatens anything besides big government.
Liberal word salad to voice their bias opinion as fact.
Thought I was the only one who caught that.... that is the baffle them with bs strategy
She's disappointed because the alphabet soup agencies will have less or no power to make laws going forward.
Unelected ATF officials have no jurisdiction over making laws. This is a win
The federal government does not look out for the people anyway so I would not be too worried about this
Our Republican legislature in GA has been lowering taxes and giving us back some of our lost freedoms. They aren't perfect, but they try hard to do what is right. Please vote Republican this November.
Darn it sucks, i feel defeated that unelected officials can't redefine legislation against my favor.
There is no 4th branch of government. The Administrative State abused Chevron.
Bingo!
Corporations are people too.The court had ruled.
I am so happy about this. Bureaucracy- Step Back! ✌️🇺🇸
The Supreme Court is wrapped up in the MAGA movement!! AKA a bowel movement!!😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
We. Do not. Live in a technocracy. For the love of god. I’m so tired of these statist/socialist/communist/oligarchs but when your religion and god is government and your rulers, it makes sense.
They overturned a “principal” that was abused so unconstitutional
Ending the Chevron Doctrine makes it easier for people to get DUE PROCESS. The purpose of the constitution is to contain the government and protect the people. The problem with Chevron was agencies commit terrible acts against the people and without recourse to the individual except through the courts. As far as I can tell, this SCOTUS action gave power to the other 2 branches and stopped the executive administrative state from USURPING both legislative and judicial power.
More freedom. What a crushing blow.
No deference for UNELECTED OFFICIALS " making law". Their regulations should be submitted for legislative, and Presidential, approval BEFORE becoming law.
They actually do that. however one the law is passed they go crazy on and bend that law completely out of shape.
@@armastatThey DO NOT SUBMIT REGULATIONS TO CONGRESS FOR APPROVAL. Congress puts "the Secretary Shall" in EVERY BILL, thus FORFEITING IT'S LAWMAKING AUTHORITY TO THE BUREAUCRACY. It's not debatable. IT'S FACT. LOOK IT UP.
@@davidnichols6971 Of course they don't. What they do is have public hearings to get input from those effected before making it official... I am not debating you. PS: the method you are complaining about - and one NOT changed by the Supreme Court's ruling - is that Congress passes a law explaining what an agency has oversight over and for what Purpose they have that oversight. The agency is expected to perform that duty and stay with in the bounds of that mandate. All this ruling does is allow Judges to disagree with the government if they disagree with what the agency thinks they are allowed to do or not. Before now they were not allowed to legally disagree. This is a really big thing - since government has lately been coloring outside the lines, but you are still over complicating the issue.
They've been coloring outside the lines my whole life, 6 decades, and before. We are NOT supposed to be governed, or ruled, by Washington. We are a Federal Republic. We have state governments for a reason. DC NEEDS TO BE CLEANSED, and returned to it's original, constitutional purpose. That purpose does not include using it's power to turn the entire country into The Democratic Republic of Californis. Which is what the present regime is doing.
I knew right from the beginning this was clickbait. First thing out of her mouth was “Democracy Now“. She doesn’t even know we have a Constitutional Republic! Not a Democracy, as many socialists & communist countries claim to be.
Thumb down for anyone says this is bad
I think the Supreme Court is saying to the Congress to do your job.
Legitimate questions I have.
What does the word democracy have to do with a Republic?
If we were founded as a Republic why then the Old English system of court precedence? (this question has application found in the first)
According to the Constitution Who is the final arbiter of the Law?
This is the best example of fear mongering I've seen in a long time
And yet the worst example of common Sense
@@KathyFranklinu2 It's a two'fer lol
How so?
@@craig8638 this rule let the government have unlimited overreach. They can basically say something is illegal without passing a law, which makes the whole point of Congress pointless. The country was just fine before and it’ll be fine without it.
@@IamKingSleezy Just fine? Having corporations operate with impunity to do whatever cost saving measure they want e.g. no environmental protections, no regulations on labor? Do you remember having child workers and working seven days a week? It would be a shame if some corporation wanted to dump their chemical waste in your neighborhood and you couldn't do a thing about it.