The Supreme Court heard two cases Monday that give it an opportunity to limit agency power, a theme for the right-wing bench throughout recent terms.
Dark Money talking again…rather loudly. I’m liking Justice Brown Jackson very much so far; unlike Clarence, she actually speaks in court. I’m afraid the RW majority are going to push this one through. The capitalists don’t like any darned regulation.
Good summary article. If only Jackson, or Sotomayor, were Chief Justice with a 6-3 sane and ethical majority.
Bravo for Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s efforts to head off the Court’s predilection to eviscerate the ability of Federal regulatory agencies to do the work that Congress assigned them to do. Hamstringing the agencies would do unspeakable damage to our climate, our economy, our wild lands, our national parks, our water, etc., etc., etc. They all are required to announce proposed new regulations and allow time for public comment and litigation. It is a process that has worked for a very long time. Most assuredly, some people are not happy with it, but most of them have little or no concern for the well-being of our country and its people at large.
Exhibit “A” for why the “establishment” fears the power of the people. And a Black female judge demonstrating wisdom, rationality and the intend of congress, getting it on the record. Making republicans shake in their threatened boots. Oh, My, oh, my.
Bring it Judge Jackson. We love you.
Edited spelling error.
Seconded.
The ludicrousness of destroying our Planet for the addition of more Oligarchy is mind-boggling.
Wishing Justice Jackson decades of accomplishments on the Supreme Court
Sensible people know she makes sense. Cultists and ideologues are busy getting in their own way…
(Somewhat) OT, but good news:
Agree but Kagan as Chief.
bIDeN iS a fAiLeD pReSiDeNt!!!1!!!
Cry harder, bitches.
Nevertheless — the right-wing justices have shown an affinity for shackling agencies in the name of democracy.
In the name, but not in the intent of democracy. In fact, they are doing it in the name of Oligarchy. The The Federalist Society, the GOP, and the Trumpists are trying like hell to bring back the “golden age” of the Robber Baron. And sadly, they are succeeding.
“We are not to simply bandage the wounds of victims beneath the wheels of injustice, we are to drive a spoke into the wheel itself.” ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Shout out to Canadian philosopher Joe Heath, whose recent book (Machinery of Government) sets forth an entirely sensible view of administrative power
I hated Administrative Law when I was in law school, but it turned out to be the most useful class that I took. I’m glad that Justice Jackson took it, too. The last thing we need is for the expert administrative agencies to lose the power to regulate and to adjudicate in the first instance so that ultra-conservative judges and the likes of Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert and Jim Jordan can decide which areas of American life can be regulated (e.g., reproductive rights) and which, like fossil fuel extraction, need no regulation at all.
And a shout out to Canadian philosopher, Neil Young who said…
Keep on rocking in the free world 
I actually find myself on the conservative, I suppose, side of this case. Agency courts should not exist. There is a conflict of interest there that undermines the whole idea of separation of powers, even with real judicial review from the circuit court level.
Agencies should be able to file orders and assign fines/penalties, but if someone disagree’s that should be resolved in an Article III court. If congress is worried about expertise, they can create a special purpose circuit within the judicial branch.
and
Looking for a heart of gold 
Sheee-it. To hell w/ “the Planet”, “climate”, and whatnot.
We’ll all be dead from the poisons encouraged into our food, medicines, clothes, air, water, and soil 'way before any of that other stuff matters to anyone. 
that Congress was not explicit enough in its legislative delegation of authority, so the agency lacks power to do whatever it’s trying to do.
Why do I never hear the inverse? That if Congress disagrees with an agency’s rules, they can pass legislation to reign the agency in. Is it because the justices know that with a dysfunctional legislature, this will never happen?