Anonymous ID: 2227a8 July 15, 2024, 5:31 a.m. No.21209243   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9245

have you heard of the chevron case?

 

OPINION ANALYSIS

Supreme Court strikes down Chevron, curtailing power of federal agencies

By Amy Howe

on Jun 28, 2024 at 12:37 pm

FacebookLinkedInTwitterEmailPrintFriendlyShare

A statute on the steps on the Supreme Court

The court ruled in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce on Friday. (Thomas Hawk via Flickr)

This article was updated on June 28 at 3:46 p.m.

 

In a major ruling, the Supreme Court on Friday cut back sharply on the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they administer and ruled that courts should rely on their own interpretion of ambiguous laws. The decision will likely have far-reaching effects across the country, from environmental regulation to healthcare costs.

 

By a vote of 6-3, the justices overruled their landmark 1984 decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, which gave rise to the doctrine known as the Chevron doctrine. Under that doctrine, if Congress has not directly addressed the question at the center of a dispute, a court was required to uphold the agency’s interpretation of the statute as long as it was reasonable. But in a 35-page ruling by Chief Justice John Roberts, the justices rejected that doctrine, calling it “fundamentally misguided.”

 

Justice Elena Kagan dissented, in an opinion joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Kagan predicted that Friday’s ruling “will cause a massive shock to the legal system.”

 

When the Supreme Court first issued its decision in the Chevron case more than 40 years ago, the decision was not necessarily regarded as a particularly consequential one. But in the years since then, it became one of the most important rulings on federal administrative law, cited by federal courts more than 18,000 times.

Anonymous ID: 2227a8 July 15, 2024, 5:55 a.m. No.21209342   🗄️.is 🔗kun

so prince charles car license plates eby 5225 says he has possession over the earth.

i get really defensive. it's my bubble.

it's my pearl. i have specific reason for claiming this and not for bad…but for someone who sits like he's king to claim and say they own it makes me irritated they think they can possess something and someone like it's something materialistic when in fact it's/they are not.

The kings who show greed and watnots should be put in their place and understand WHO put them there.

god's can't be god's without people.

kings can't be kings without people.

they better recognize who really runs this ship.