Anonymous ID: b76aa6 July 30, 2024, 12:57 p.m. No.21322593   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2702 >>3047 >>3099 >>3272 >>3334

Overturning Chevron: A Wrong Made Right

Marc Wheat

Overturning Chevron: A Wrong Made Right

This June, the Supreme Court struck a major blow to the bureaucratic behemoth of the administrative state by overturning Chevron. The 1984 Chevron decision had long directed courts to defer to the administrative state’s interpretation of the law, granting enormous powers, including the judicial branch’s core power of interpreting law, to an unelected, entrenched bureaucracy. As of this summer, this wrong has finally been set right.

 

The decision restores critical authorities to their constitutionally mandated branches of government, ensuring accountability to the American people.

 

What may at first seem like a mere abstract legal issue has had real world consequences for Americans. Chevron took power away from citizens, rendering them nearly defenseless against the tyranny of the administrative state. America’s Founders would be horrified by the cascading effects of this doctrine.

 

Take the cases that overturned Chevron: Loper Bright and Relentless. In these cases, small fishing companies challenged the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (NMFS) interpretation of the Magnuson-Stevens Act which requires fishing boats take a bureaucrat on their trips to make sure they are following the law. The question in the case was if the law required fishing companies to pay the salary of these bureaucrats – a significant expense at up to $700 per day. By overturning Chevron, the Supreme Court put these fishing companies, and anyone else fighting the administrative state in court, back on a level playing field.

 

Advancing American Freedom has remained laser focused on seeing Chevron overturned. In our 17 amicus briefs filed on the issue, we led a coalition of a combined 91 other organizations and individuals, arguing in both appellate courts and at the Supreme Court that Chevron was a danger to the liberties protected by the Constitution. Now that the Loper Bright decision has restored an element of judicial power to check administrative agencies, we must ensure that all branches of government reclaim their constitutional authority from the administrative state.

 

For this reason, our latest amicus brief, Consumers’ Research v. Consumer Product Safety Commission filed this July and joined by 36 other amici, urged the Supreme Court to return constitutional powers currently usurped by the administrative state back to the president. At issue in this case is the inability of the president to remove certain administrative agency heads, empowering these agencies to operate independently beyond the control of the chief executive. Should Congress cede further power to an agency, the agency would in effect function without any meaningful oversight from either the executive or the legislative branch. This situation spells disaster for our system of government and the freedom of all Americans, undermining the ideals and laws of the Constitution. Returning power to the president, however, would restore the Constitution’s balance between Congress and the president in overseeing the functioning of executive agencies.

 

It is clear that a ballooning and unaccountable administrative state throws a wrench into the constitutional balance of powers essential to the health of our nation. The Constitution creates a system of government comprised of three coequal branches, each of which can balance the power of the other two. In overturning Chevron, the Court has appropriately checked a degree of the administrative state’s power. Now, Congress must summon the courage to legislate in a way that prevents the further illegitimate expansion of federal bureaucracy. At the same time, the Supreme Court should continue to check the expansion of the administrative state at the expense of the constitutional authorities of the president.

 

The Founders knew that the liberty of the American people depends on limiting government power. The administrative state operates as a fourth branch of government. That problem will not begin to be solved until it is made accountable to the chief executive. Ensuring the God-given rights of the citizens of this country demands reining in the federal bureaucracy once and for all and restoring an equal balance of power among three branches of government.

 

Marc Wheat Is General Counsel for Advancing American Freedom

Anonymous ID: b76aa6 July 30, 2024, 1:24 p.m. No.21322720   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2747 >>3047 >>3099 >>3272 >>3334

>>21322698

 

J.D. Vance has made it impossible for Trump to run away from Project 2025

He wrote the foreword for a new book by Project 2025’s architect — and has backed some of its most extreme ideas.

 

Andrew ProkopJul 25, 2024 at 3:00 AM PDT

 

https://www.vox.com/politics/362917/jd-vance-project-2025-book-kevin-roberts-trump

 

Former President Donald Trump has lately been trying to distance himself from Project 2025, claiming it was cooked up by the “severe right” and that he doesn’t know anything about it.

 

But it turns out the severe right is coming from inside the house.

 

Kevin Roberts, the self-proclaimed “head” of Project 2025, has a book coming out in September — and the book’s foreword is written by Trump’s vice presidential candidate, J.D. Vance, who lavishly praises its ideas.

 

“Never before has a figure with Roberts’s depth and stature within the American Right tried to articulate a genuinely new future for conservatism,” Vance writes, according to the book’s Amazon page. “We are now all realizing that it’s time to circle the wagons and load the muskets. In the fights that lay ahead, these ideas are an essential weapon.”

 

What ideas? Like Vance, Roberts is obsessed with the idea that the left controls major American institutions — he lists Ivy League colleges, the FBI, the New York Times, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the Department of Education and even the Boy Scouts of America. The book argues that “conservatives need to burn down” these institutions if “we’re to preserve the American way of life.” (Vox has requested a copy of the book, but has not yet received one at the time of this writing.)

 

Obviously, this poses a problem for Trump’s attempts to distance himself from the virally unpopular Project 2025 and its lengthy agenda for what he should do if he wins, which includes proposals to restrict abortion access and centralize executive power in the presidency.

 

And it’s one more indication that Trump’s pick of Vance might be politically problematic for him. Vance has a fascination with provocative and extreme far-right thinkers, and a history of praising their ideas. He is not a running mate tailored to win over swing voters who are concerned Trump might be too extreme — quite the opposite.

 

The book was written and announced before Vance was chosen as Trump’s running mate. But there’s some indication that people involved had some late second thoughts about it. It was originally announced as “Dawn’s Early Light: Burning Down Washington to Save America,” with a cover image showing a match over the word “Washington.”

 

More recently, though, the subtitle has been changed to “Taking Back Washington to Save America,” and the match has vanished from the cover.

 

Roberts headed Project 2025 — and contributed some of its most controversial proposals

 

Project 2025, which I recently wrote about at length, is the conservative movement’s detailed and specific plan for what the next Republican president should do with his power.

 

It was crafted by people who have long worked closely with Trump and includes many policies Trump clearly supports — like centralizing power in the presidency over career civil service professionals, slashing regulations, and abandoning efforts to fight climate change. It also contains some proposals Trump currently finds politically problematic: aggressively using federal power to prevent abortions, restricting some contraceptive coverage, and banning pornography.

 

Project 2025 was put together by the conservative Heritage Foundation, which worked on it with more than 100 conservative groups. Though much of its 922-page policy document is written in dry, wonkish language, Roberts wrote the fiery introduction. The porn ban is his idea specifically — he writes:

Anonymous ID: b76aa6 July 30, 2024, 1:38 p.m. No.21322802   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>21322747

I think PDJT put one of theirs on STAGE front and center! Hillbilly Elegy is dark … Netflix funded and they just donated 7Million to Harris.

 

PDJT frequently says JD Blue collar - Technically Respectfully he should say Ivy League with his YALE education. JD Vance is a venture capitalist…who got a Book Deal and a Movie deal He’s one of theirs.

Btw JDVance hasn’t been on PDJT Truth Social since 11/24/2022 not even to thank PDJT or acknowledge the VP Nomination

Anonymous ID: b76aa6 July 30, 2024, 2:02 p.m. No.21322908   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>21322852

Why didn’t VPPence didn’t endorse PDJT

He knew this would be an incredibly negative campaign and he swore of negative campaigning.

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/mike-pence-negative-campaigning-229030

 

Now, however, Pence’s time on the ticket with Trump is straining that pledge. He has not gone negative in a Trumpian way — he has studiously avoided publicly adopting Trump’s preferred moniker for Hillary Clinton as “Crooked Hillary” — but he’s not all sunshine and rainbows either. Pence has attacked Bill Clinton’s “character,” called Hillary Clinton “the most dishonest candidate for President of the United States since Richard Nixon,” and said Vladimir Putin is a stronger leader than President Barack Obama.