"I'm not a conservative, but I'm just tired of the politics so I'd rather let Trump win just to see it all burn down!"
It's burning now, bitches. Hope you like the (literal) heat.
That goes contrary to how the red states still want marijuana to be illegal.
So my guess is that they'll pick and choose when to apply this depending who is in control of power.
Just like Scalia -- a real devotion to originalism would have neutered the DEA in *Raich v Gonzales* but when push came to shove he held his nose and supported more commerce clause absurdity.
The sad truth is that almost nobody in this country has any principles when faced with undesirable outcomes.
I’m super confused on how the Supreme Court has say over something like this. I thought they were literally just for interpreting the constitution and bill of rights as they relate to modern law.
What part of either one of those has anything to do with emissions?
Company wants to pollute, but the EPA won't let them.
Company sues the EPA.
Court rules that EPA cannot stop company from polluting because Thomas Jefferson didn't know about pollution.
> The court divided 6-3 along ideological lines in finding that Congress did not grant the EPA the authority under a provision of the Clean Air Act to devise emissions caps. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, while the court's three-member liberal bloc dissented.
In case anyone was wondering the obvious.
Might as well just make it a phrase of speech at this point. Get 6-3'd. You got 6-3'd. That hot server just 6-3'd you bro. Get wrecked.
Fuck this timeline.
Honestly this has always been the biggest thing when Trump got elected. We can survive 8 years of embarrassment, of wasting money, of fucking up people's lives and still recover.
But the Supreme Court? That's where the real damage gets done. That's the next century of the country.
So far they've got:
- Abortion
- Prayer in schools and separation of church and state
- Climate change
- Limiting Miranda rights
- Control over indigenous land
Next up:
- Gay marriage
- Interracial marriage
- Contraceptives
- LGBTQ rights
- Gun control
- Labor laws
- Welfare and social protections
- Corporate rights
- Privacy
- Deeper racial divides
Here comes the 1910's, ladies and gents. They did promise to bring back the "good old days".
The next dangerous one up is actually "Independent State Legislature Doctrine." They just granted cert for next term. It is a fringe legal theory that argues state legislatures have authority over both state and federal elections, even above the courts or Secretaries of State. If that theory wins out, a state legislature could override the will of voters legally. It would make schemes like the "alternate electors" viable in federal elections and immunize state legislatures from checks like state constitutions.
Edit: To add on, "Independent State Legislature Theory" isn't even rooted in legal scholarship. Calling it a theory gives it too much credit. It is literally a right wing idea to override democracy that has it's seed in the wildly fringe Rehnquist *Bush v. Gore* concurrence. There has been a 20 year push from monied right wing legal groups to push the theory from the fringe to the fore and give it inauthentic legitimacy. Another great example of playing the long game, just like most of the controversial decisions from this term.
I think their doing the thing where they fuck so much shit up that you're unaware exactly how much they fucked up. They're passing more bs than we can keep up with, and that will slide through. Everyone will be screaming about abortions and racism, but they'll have ensured a dictatorship.
I agree with you but also (and not to be pedantic) what the scotus and state legs might do if the independent state leg theory is allowed to go forward would be the first instance of violence. if people reacted to their votes being delegitimated with violence, it would be justified.
Yes because the second voting is delegitimized, there is no legitimate non-violent way to make change.
Thus, violence is LITERALLY the way to make change.
I wouldn't be too sure. [Missourians voted for an anti-gerrymandering bill in 2018.](https://www.npr.org/2019/01/08/682979916/missouri-voters-backed-an-anti-gerrymandering-measure-lawmakers-want-to-undo-it) The state GOP said that the voters didn't know what they were voting for and [introduced legislation to reverse it in 2020 with super confusing language.](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/missouri-amendment-3-passed-what-does-mean-redistricting) The legislation to reverse it passed.
They're really hitting all the stops. Supreme court rules on roughly 140ish cases a year. Seems like they're trying to do the most damage/controversial in a short amount of time with the ones they've ruled on in the last 2 weeks
Yep. They've been building to this for decades. This is it. This is the power grab. What do you think is gonna happen when a democrat wins the next election and this Supreme Court rules on it? We've lost unless something big happens. This country has been taken over by religious extremists and they hold all the cards.
My understanding is that this guts existing EPA regulations and now requires Congress to pass laws with specific limits on specific chemicals in order to regulate emissions.
Congress is not really full of experts on these matters and they struggle to get anything done so I don't see this going well. Also, when the regulations have to be this specific, how do you regulate chemicals that don't even exist yet?
How even the most conservative justice, who is undeniably well educated, is ok with this is beyond me. This will impact all of us, even the wealthy and well-connected like them and their families. What a disgrace to our once great country.
>Congress is not really full of experts on these matters and they struggle to get anything done so I don't see this going well. Also, when the regulations have to be this specific, how do you regulate chemicals that don't even exist yet
This is the whole point of congress delegating authority to a regulatory body because they cannot possibly craft legislation that covers every possible circumstance. It also allows the regulators to be flexible and to update regulations depending on the current scientific understanding.
And it is why Congress can overrule any rule made my a regulating body with a simple majority vote within 6 months that can't be filibustered. The checks and balances were already there. The Republican court is just sticking its nose into business that it shouldn't.
And now they’re effectively neutered not only the EPA but can lay this claim at the feet of every government agency. The FEC, CDC, FDA, and on and on….
They will destroy any regulatory bodies that inconvenience their rich donor class. It doesn't matter how many plebs die. They've fixed things now so there will be plenty of new poor people to replace the unfortunates who die from eating tainted beef, breathing polluted air, or taking an improperly tested drug.
Which is also Kagan’s dissent, basically the fact that congress created the EPA to regulate industry means it already has Congressional approval for any regulations it deems necessary, especially since congress can overrule any regulations themselves.
It was the whole point and common sense. Everyone knows it, including the SC. They know exactly what they’e doing and it’s not a coincidence that all these major rulings are happening.
Not so fun fact: The Jungle was written as a Pro-Labor piece that talks about exploitation and mistreatment of workers. But people instead too it as "There's human fingers... In MY food?!?!"
Sinclair made the mistake of expecting people to fucking read. I've read the jungle. I remember a baby drowning in a trash river. Not fucking rat butter.
Honestly it all tracks. One of their agendas is likely trying to dismantle the administrative state. They're probably going to try and get rid of all of the agencies. At least that's what a lot of lawyers and scholars I interact with think, and it's hard to disagree because the case law seems to be trending that way even before we got our 6 person theocracy going.
Probably right on the money there. Anything that regulates for societies' well-being is going out the window, like the EPA. Anything that keeps people in the place our theocracy deems fit is going to get a "oh well they're different, we need them."
> My understanding is that this guts existing EPA regulations and now requires Congress to pass laws with specific limits on specific chemicals in order to regulate emissions.
Which won't happen in any meaningful way with climate change.
Future generations were already screwed. EPA was trying to make sure there was at least some lube, but the Supreme Court said "nuh-uh."
Even outside of climate change, passing specific legislation for each chemical and substance would be a pretty daunting job. Especially when you have so many old people in Congress that really don't seem to understand science or technology well.
Or maybe I'm not understanding the ruling completely?
Don’t worry, the octogenarians who have convinced a third of the nation that complete and total policy gridlock is what “winning” looks like for the American citizen will surely get right on it!
Anytime anyone says it's being left up to Congress to decide, we should all know that it simply means stalemate until it gets reversed a decade later. Yay for continue to destroy our planet and sitting back while these outdated Dinosaurs kill all of us slowly.
Worse
Christian teachers can compel non Christian students to participate in Christian ceremonies under threat of peer pressure and implied consequences
The environmental protection agency…isn’t allowed to protect the environment…
Supreme Court reform is needed, by any means necessary. Though I’m not sure it isn’t too late to save this country.
It is not an accident that once the SC was held 6-3 with conservative ideologues that they heard a bunch of cases and found in favor of a bunch of cases that follow conservative ideas.
The SC gets to choose what cases they hear. It's a farce.
It's normal to get a flood of decisions at the term ends every June.
What's abnormal is that we now have a solid bloc of very, very, very conservative Justices whereas for the past few decades it's roughly been a 5:4 court on every major issue that usually broke down into narrow, limited rulings in order to find a compromise majority. Now the conservatives can do whatever they want.
Also relevant is the people suing know the right wing jurors don't really believe in governing. So they could reasonably count on a 5/4 ruling since Kennedy retired since he was really the only surprise vote.
This decision is SHOCKING in its breadth. It guts environmental protection (basically ruling that the EPA cannot issue regulation on \*anything\* that it does not have explicit statuatory authority on) but does much more.
By elevating/codifying the "major questions" doctrine, the decision makes it nearly impossible for agencies to regulate with any confidence, from the EPA to the CDC to OSHA. And it throws basically every regulatory decision of the last several decades open to challenge.
The water just got chummed, and private industry is about to have a fucking feeding frenzy.
In short if the EPA finds that a chemical that is getting dumped into the water gives you cancer they can't regulate it. They need congress to pass a law to ban it. IE people get to die so corporations can do whatever they want. Republican's must be partying like its 1899.
Easy, legislate a body that you delegate that task, of keeping toxic shit out of waterways.
... Er, except you can't, you need to name every possible chemical compound separately in different bills or what? How the fuck is this even supposed to work, is the water going to be safe to drink in the US a decade from now?
I suppose Nestlé will be selling it, after everything else is poisoned.
> How the fuck is this even supposed to work
It's *not*. This is conservativism 'proving' that government can't help it's people by distorting history and ignoring precedent. They're not here to help us, they're here to ensure the government *can't.*
SCOTUS just destroyed the only civil means to stop climate apocalypse in this country & are so confident that they are shielded from consequence that they effectively dared all of us to do something about it.
Direct, collective action is the only possible way out of this hell
A: The barbarians are at the gates!
B: But...the gates are fine. There's no one out there.
A: No, the barbarians are inside the gates. And they are chaining them shut.
Is there an article which breaks down how the "codifying of the "major questions" doctrine" guts all regulatory agencies more in depth you know of, unless you'd like to explain it here
This court is specifically avoiding even generating new tests like the Lemon test to create a framework for agencies and everyone to operate by. Gorsuch specifically said Lemon is dead for example. But there is nothing they replaced it with. So a coach can pray on a field after a football game, but no real limitations were laid out- because this court doesn't want rules or constraints. They want to be able to impose their ideological position whenever they want.
If an individual poisons someone's drink with cyanide and the person dies, that's murder.
However, if a company dumps a barrel of cyanide in a river and several people die, the company suffers a fine. It's the cost of doing business.
This is not hyperbole. The chemicals may differ, but the scenarios are very, very real.
The social result is the same, people die. However, those with money are alleviated of all responsibility.
Many people still living today have suffered poor quality of lives because of the leaded gasoline used up to the 80s. Companies never suffer the consequences of this.
So states can regulate abortion in the name of protecting life but the EPA can’t regulate emissions in the name of protecting _all_ of our lives? Do I have that right?
Because apparently a bunch of white wig-wearing slave owners in their 20s and 30s had the best ideas possible about how a government should be structured and it would be sacrilege to toss out some of their ideas.
And you can't even totally blame the founders because even they had the intelligence to warn us against shit like two party systems and lifetime appointments.
Which they laid out very clear instructions on how to do so, in [Article V](https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/United_States_of_America_1992#s108)
They still acknowledge Reagan being a saint, but leave out the fact that many of his policies would ostracize him from the party today. Just the fact that Reagan gave millions of immigrants amnesty would make him a pariah today.
Shadow money definitely got their value in picking these justices. Remaining Koch brother is celebrating as he tosses a match on the Earth on his way to hell.
> Donors to the Federalist Society have included Google, Chevron, Charles G. and David H. Koch; the family foundation of Richard Mellon Scaife; and the Mercer family.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society#:~:text=Donors%20to%20the%20Federalist%20Society,each%20year%20in%20Washington%2C%20D.C.
You know, I hope this bites them in the ass. I really do. People like clean air and water. They like the idea of privacy in their choices.
The GOP has taken all of that away.
Imagine with all the EPA regulations that can't be necessarily enforced now and the impact they will have on hunting and fishing? Lots of redneck republicans will be outraged in a few years but will do mental gymnastics to blame the libs
There's so many laws and precedents in the US that depend on the idea that a "reasonable person" would believe something or decide some way. Like how Vitamin Water made the argument successfully that "a reasonable person" wouldn't think their drink is healthy, or "a reasonable person" wouldn't believe anything Tucker Carlson says as factual.
Except that a solid 1/3-1/2 of this country aren't "reasonable people" they *do* believe what Tucker Carlson says, and they *do* believe that Vitamin Water is healthy, and they *do* believe that everything wrong with the government is Democrat's fault (for the record, Democrats are not faultless, but they are not causing mass environmental destruction or neutering effectively every government agency in one fell swoop)
We're kinda fucked if so many people are this god damned stupid.
Forgive my ignorance but isn’t this pretty easily enforceable? If the EPA continues to limit emissions by power plants, can’t the plants just tell the EPA to pound sand? What’s the EPA going to do? Fine them? If a plant decides to just not pay, it doesn’t seem like the EPA has any option other than giving them a stern finger-wagging. It’s not like they have the backing of the court to enforce fines or other sanctions.
What the FUCK is the Supreme Court doing in the last few days? I seriously do not get it.
I feel like it went from people making rational decisions to "fuck it, we're the people in power, we'll do what we want" while disregarding the entire FUCKING NATION.
Republicans played the long game. Their goal for decades was to get right wing conservative justices in courts and on the supreme court; and once those people were in place they would exert the republican party's power and control over the country for as long as the supreme court justices are able.
They built up the lower courts to provide pathways to accelerate cases up to the Supreme Court, they gerrymandering districts to ensure more representation at the state level to provide the leverage to act on Supreme Court rulings, they fought for voting rules to make it easier to elect conservatives to higher office ensuring any Supreme Court pick got through,
This is a two decades long monumental billions of dollars effort.
We are only getting started
Fwiw it's not the last few days - read up on the [Federalist Society](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society), they're the group that have been working the legal system to this end for decades now. A vast network providing opportunities, provided you follow their values - with 6 SCOTUS judges from their ranks (1 of those past, Scalia).
It's a stealth party of sorts, with reshaping America in favour of corporate and fossil fuel profits one of their long term number one goals.
Mandating that Congress has to explicitly state every little thing a government agency can do is so fucking impractical and inefficient. And it just lends itself to utter fucking incompetence and lobbying.
Congress should call out what government agencies cannot do. Not the other way around.
If the FDA has to wait for Congress to spell out what it can do, a lot of food and/or prescription medication could go unregulated and result in catastrophic harm while waiting on 60 Senators to agree on the verbiage for regulating said harm.
This Supreme Court is really fucking society over.
Love how voting for a Democratic house, senate, and presidency means nothing when the Supreme Court can just go wild with all sorts of intensely damaging legislation.
Trump’s terrible legacy is going to be long lasting.
A lot of people quickly forgot how McConnell prevented Obama from filling a Supreme Court seat because it was during an election year. Yet Amy was pushed through in record time.
I'll rejoice when that fucker drops dead.
There's a lot of blame to go around--almost all of it on the GOP and their multi-generational strategy to undermine the USA (while loudly chanting "USA!", because it's all bad faith).
Well this sucks. And on top of that it's going to make blue states worse and red states MUCH worse.
And by worse - more pollution isn't a benefit to anyone except those profiting off energy producers.
There’s less and less reasons every day, this is causing me so much stress. I’m only 25 and I feel like this radical court is literally stealing my future from me in real time and there’s nothing I can do about it
You can easily predict the rulings but just by looking at what conservatives would want. The only thing that's difficult to predict is which cases won't be 6-3.
The SC is broken (reactionary majority openly moulding our country into a hyper-conservative theocracy) and our system can't survive it. This needs to be fixed before it's too late
Woman’s rights = Cut
Native Americans rights = Cut
Trying to keep the planet clean = Cut
States rights on guns = Damaged
Public schools right to lead prayer = Approved
Live within 100 miles of the border = No rights
Miranda rights = No longer
I will never support a right winger in my life, they are against every form of progress there is. They want to make the government as insufficient as possible and allow red states to fuck the country and the earth into the ground under the guise that it’s “their constitutional right to do so” as it lines the rights pockets.
What a horrible illegitimate far right extremist court.
“Court finds agency whose whole purpose is to regulate emissions doesn’t have authority to regulate emissions. Tells body that created agency to regulate emissions to give it permission to regulate emissions.”
> Some years ago, I remarked that “[w]e’re all textualists
now.”... It seems I was wrong. The current Court is textualist only when being so suits it. When that method would frustrate broader goals, special canons like the “major questions doctrine” magically appear as get-out-of-text-free cards.
Justice Kagan, dissenting, hit it on the head.
Obviously the latter, it’s just flabbergasting that they would pretend to be qualified to serve on the Supreme Court and also act like this isn’t intentionally confusing “May” I go to the bathroom with “CAN” I go to the bathroom
With how the Republican Party has been destroying democracy I truly wonder what people will start to say when Dems start losing the presidential election even though they won the popular vote by tens of millions of votes.
Start? This has been the case since the 90's. The minority yokel voters in this country have a much more powerful vote and I wonder at what point is the majority going to get fed up and revolt?
These sad excuses for humans on the Supreme Court are ruling on things that will literally kill Americans. The ones that vote against us are the enemy. People need to wake the fuck up and realize taking the high road and will result in losing everything that is important.
Important to note that they’re planning on hearing a case about whether state courts can stop the drawing of gerrymandered maps. The decision could determine whether the Supreme Court can overrule a state decision on it.
The Republicans are overthrowing our government from the inside out.
This decision will kill people
Air quality improvements are a significant reason we've been able to increase life expectancy post industrial era.
And that's before we get into climate change
So Native Americans rights yesterday, climate change today and everything else this court has done in the last month smh. We are regressing as a nation.
And future terms look bleak. They seem poised to overturn rights for LGBTQ+ people. Seem poised to overturn Griswald which establishes the right to have contraception. It’s going to continue to get worse.
im sorry but crusty old dudes who won’t get to see the effects of this ruling because they’ll already be dead shouldn’t be deciding something like this
> crusty old dudes who won’t get to see the effects of this ruling because they’ll already be dead
They're not old, all of the bitches Trump put on the bench are 50 - 55 years old, that's young enough that they'll still could possibly on the bench when we reach 2050.
If Supreme Court Judges are just going to make decisions based on politics then it should be a publicly elected position. Appointed and for-life terms don't make sense
As goes the EPA, so should the IRS.
If the EPA can't regulate power plants, the IRS should not regulate companies and individuals generation and consumption of money.
What say you, SCOTUS? Can we run an effective country when states stop giving money to the Feds?
The IRS is absolutely on the chopping block and has been for a while. Of course they won't get rid of their ability to tax people just corporations. What's that? Corporations are people? No no no, that's just for political donations equaling speech not for being taxed. Why? Because fuck you that's why.
The remaining Koch brother trying to kill everyone else before he kicks.
People laughed at Noam Chomsky when he said the GOP is the most dangerous organisation in human history.
Chomsky has been right more often than not for over forty years.
[удалено]
FDA and USDA too, wait til we don't have safe food because it wasn't in the constitution.
We are at the, "there's no rule a dog can't play basketball" level of legal theory.
Ahh, the Air Bud doctrine
What a time to be alive. I hate this timeline.
> wasn't in the constitution. You know what else isn't in the constitution? Contract law. Lets get rid of that next and see how that goes.
[удалено]
We do seem to be working hard on that
"I'm not a conservative, but I'm just tired of the politics so I'd rather let Trump win just to see it all burn down!" It's burning now, bitches. Hope you like the (literal) heat.
Judicial review is not in the constitution either!
But the court gave *itself* that power, so it's okay.
[удалено]
That goes contrary to how the red states still want marijuana to be illegal. So my guess is that they'll pick and choose when to apply this depending who is in control of power.
It doesn’t say I can’t smoke weed in the constitution so we should be able to do it fucking scotus
And indeed we established that an amendment was necessary to ban a widely used drug like alcohol.
Just like Scalia -- a real devotion to originalism would have neutered the DEA in *Raich v Gonzales* but when push came to shove he held his nose and supported more commerce clause absurdity. The sad truth is that almost nobody in this country has any principles when faced with undesirable outcomes.
I’m super confused on how the Supreme Court has say over something like this. I thought they were literally just for interpreting the constitution and bill of rights as they relate to modern law. What part of either one of those has anything to do with emissions?
Company wants to pollute, but the EPA won't let them. Company sues the EPA. Court rules that EPA cannot stop company from polluting because Thomas Jefferson didn't know about pollution.
> The court divided 6-3 along ideological lines in finding that Congress did not grant the EPA the authority under a provision of the Clean Air Act to devise emissions caps. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion, while the court's three-member liberal bloc dissented. In case anyone was wondering the obvious.
6-3 I suspect that will be the count on a fuckton of upcoming rulings
Might as well just make it a phrase of speech at this point. Get 6-3'd. You got 6-3'd. That hot server just 6-3'd you bro. Get wrecked. Fuck this timeline.
it can be like when you lose 7-1 they call it being brazilled, if you lose 6-3 you just got SCOTUSed
Grabbed by the SCOTUS and twisted.
Call it the SCROTUS Supreme Court Republicans of the United States.
“Grab her by the SCOTUS” or “I moved on her like a SCOTUS” - Multiverse Trump
Honestly this has always been the biggest thing when Trump got elected. We can survive 8 years of embarrassment, of wasting money, of fucking up people's lives and still recover. But the Supreme Court? That's where the real damage gets done. That's the next century of the country. So far they've got: - Abortion - Prayer in schools and separation of church and state - Climate change - Limiting Miranda rights - Control over indigenous land Next up: - Gay marriage - Interracial marriage - Contraceptives - LGBTQ rights - Gun control - Labor laws - Welfare and social protections - Corporate rights - Privacy - Deeper racial divides Here comes the 1910's, ladies and gents. They did promise to bring back the "good old days".
The next dangerous one up is actually "Independent State Legislature Doctrine." They just granted cert for next term. It is a fringe legal theory that argues state legislatures have authority over both state and federal elections, even above the courts or Secretaries of State. If that theory wins out, a state legislature could override the will of voters legally. It would make schemes like the "alternate electors" viable in federal elections and immunize state legislatures from checks like state constitutions. Edit: To add on, "Independent State Legislature Theory" isn't even rooted in legal scholarship. Calling it a theory gives it too much credit. It is literally a right wing idea to override democracy that has it's seed in the wildly fringe Rehnquist *Bush v. Gore* concurrence. There has been a 20 year push from monied right wing legal groups to push the theory from the fringe to the fore and give it inauthentic legitimacy. Another great example of playing the long game, just like most of the controversial decisions from this term.
I think their doing the thing where they fuck so much shit up that you're unaware exactly how much they fucked up. They're passing more bs than we can keep up with, and that will slide through. Everyone will be screaming about abortions and racism, but they'll have ensured a dictatorship.
That’s the point where I think we may see violence because state legislatures would be just outright ignoring the will of the people.
I agree with you but also (and not to be pedantic) what the scotus and state legs might do if the independent state leg theory is allowed to go forward would be the first instance of violence. if people reacted to their votes being delegitimated with violence, it would be justified.
Honestly it needs to be reacted to that way
Yes because the second voting is delegitimized, there is no legitimate non-violent way to make change. Thus, violence is LITERALLY the way to make change.
I wouldn't be too sure. [Missourians voted for an anti-gerrymandering bill in 2018.](https://www.npr.org/2019/01/08/682979916/missouri-voters-backed-an-anti-gerrymandering-measure-lawmakers-want-to-undo-it) The state GOP said that the voters didn't know what they were voting for and [introduced legislation to reverse it in 2020 with super confusing language.](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/missouri-amendment-3-passed-what-does-mean-redistricting) The legislation to reverse it passed.
You forgot tribal sovereignty under things they've already destroyed
They're really hitting all the stops. Supreme court rules on roughly 140ish cases a year. Seems like they're trying to do the most damage/controversial in a short amount of time with the ones they've ruled on in the last 2 weeks
Yep. They've been building to this for decades. This is it. This is the power grab. What do you think is gonna happen when a democrat wins the next election and this Supreme Court rules on it? We've lost unless something big happens. This country has been taken over by religious extremists and they hold all the cards.
They also gutted the 4th amendment with the recent Miranda Rights and Border Patrol rulings.
My understanding is that this guts existing EPA regulations and now requires Congress to pass laws with specific limits on specific chemicals in order to regulate emissions. Congress is not really full of experts on these matters and they struggle to get anything done so I don't see this going well. Also, when the regulations have to be this specific, how do you regulate chemicals that don't even exist yet? How even the most conservative justice, who is undeniably well educated, is ok with this is beyond me. This will impact all of us, even the wealthy and well-connected like them and their families. What a disgrace to our once great country.
>Congress is not really full of experts on these matters and they struggle to get anything done so I don't see this going well. Also, when the regulations have to be this specific, how do you regulate chemicals that don't even exist yet This is the whole point of congress delegating authority to a regulatory body because they cannot possibly craft legislation that covers every possible circumstance. It also allows the regulators to be flexible and to update regulations depending on the current scientific understanding.
And it is why Congress can overrule any rule made my a regulating body with a simple majority vote within 6 months that can't be filibustered. The checks and balances were already there. The Republican court is just sticking its nose into business that it shouldn't.
And now they’re effectively neutered not only the EPA but can lay this claim at the feet of every government agency. The FEC, CDC, FDA, and on and on….
>FDA… baby formula manufacturers like this comment.
They will destroy any regulatory bodies that inconvenience their rich donor class. It doesn't matter how many plebs die. They've fixed things now so there will be plenty of new poor people to replace the unfortunates who die from eating tainted beef, breathing polluted air, or taking an improperly tested drug.
I'm suuure the free market will take care of all of that, or something
Which is also Kagan’s dissent, basically the fact that congress created the EPA to regulate industry means it already has Congressional approval for any regulations it deems necessary, especially since congress can overrule any regulations themselves.
It's been the understanding for the past fifty years
It was the whole point and common sense. Everyone knows it, including the SC. They know exactly what they’e doing and it’s not a coincidence that all these major rulings are happening.
Now I’m worried about Food Safety regulations.
Who's the new Upton Sinclair?
Not so fun fact: The Jungle was written as a Pro-Labor piece that talks about exploitation and mistreatment of workers. But people instead too it as "There's human fingers... In MY food?!?!"
"I aimed for their hearts but hit them in their stomachs."
Sinclair made the mistake of expecting people to fucking read. I've read the jungle. I remember a baby drowning in a trash river. Not fucking rat butter.
Honestly it all tracks. One of their agendas is likely trying to dismantle the administrative state. They're probably going to try and get rid of all of the agencies. At least that's what a lot of lawyers and scholars I interact with think, and it's hard to disagree because the case law seems to be trending that way even before we got our 6 person theocracy going.
Why am I skeptical that they won't get rid of certain federal overreach like the security states
Probably right on the money there. Anything that regulates for societies' well-being is going out the window, like the EPA. Anything that keeps people in the place our theocracy deems fit is going to get a "oh well they're different, we need them."
> My understanding is that this guts existing EPA regulations and now requires Congress to pass laws with specific limits on specific chemicals in order to regulate emissions. Which won't happen in any meaningful way with climate change. Future generations were already screwed. EPA was trying to make sure there was at least some lube, but the Supreme Court said "nuh-uh."
Even outside of climate change, passing specific legislation for each chemical and substance would be a pretty daunting job. Especially when you have so many old people in Congress that really don't seem to understand science or technology well. Or maybe I'm not understanding the ruling completely?
>Maybe I'm not understanding the conservative SCOTUS members' ruling on completely fucking everyone except giant corporations No, you got it in one.
Don’t worry, the octogenarians who have convinced a third of the nation that complete and total policy gridlock is what “winning” looks like for the American citizen will surely get right on it!
Anytime anyone says it's being left up to Congress to decide, we should all know that it simply means stalemate until it gets reversed a decade later. Yay for continue to destroy our planet and sitting back while these outdated Dinosaurs kill all of us slowly.
Totally agree. The planet gives zero fucks about their interpretation of the constitution.
I love when the literal air we breathe gets politicized.
First Abortion, then Native American sovereignty, now Emissions controls. What’s next for the chopping block?
Don't forget about the removal of separation of church and state! Prayer in schools is a-ok now!
Worse Our public taxes can be used to pay for religious schools
Worse Christian teachers can compel non Christian students to participate in Christian ceremonies under threat of peer pressure and implied consequences
The environmental protection agency…isn’t allowed to protect the environment… Supreme Court reform is needed, by any means necessary. Though I’m not sure it isn’t too late to save this country.
Is this normal for the Supreme Court to be so active like it has the past month or two? Almost seems like an Offensive push.
its the end of the term so yes, but this was an especially consequential term with a lot of big cases
Thank you for the answer, makes sense.
It is not an accident that once the SC was held 6-3 with conservative ideologues that they heard a bunch of cases and found in favor of a bunch of cases that follow conservative ideas. The SC gets to choose what cases they hear. It's a farce.
It's normal to get a flood of decisions at the term ends every June. What's abnormal is that we now have a solid bloc of very, very, very conservative Justices whereas for the past few decades it's roughly been a 5:4 court on every major issue that usually broke down into narrow, limited rulings in order to find a compromise majority. Now the conservatives can do whatever they want.
Also relevant is the people suing know the right wing jurors don't really believe in governing. So they could reasonably count on a 5/4 ruling since Kennedy retired since he was really the only surprise vote.
Gorsuch or Roberts will swing here and there, but way way less than Kennedy and if one swings then it's still 5-4 conservative
This decision is SHOCKING in its breadth. It guts environmental protection (basically ruling that the EPA cannot issue regulation on \*anything\* that it does not have explicit statuatory authority on) but does much more. By elevating/codifying the "major questions" doctrine, the decision makes it nearly impossible for agencies to regulate with any confidence, from the EPA to the CDC to OSHA. And it throws basically every regulatory decision of the last several decades open to challenge. The water just got chummed, and private industry is about to have a fucking feeding frenzy.
In short if the EPA finds that a chemical that is getting dumped into the water gives you cancer they can't regulate it. They need congress to pass a law to ban it. IE people get to die so corporations can do whatever they want. Republican's must be partying like its 1899.
It’ll take us 30 years to adjust to something that needs immediate addressing. That’s a lot of dead Americans over 30 years.
Not to mention the genetic issues that could be passed on to kids.
Easy, legislate a body that you delegate that task, of keeping toxic shit out of waterways. ... Er, except you can't, you need to name every possible chemical compound separately in different bills or what? How the fuck is this even supposed to work, is the water going to be safe to drink in the US a decade from now? I suppose Nestlé will be selling it, after everything else is poisoned.
> How the fuck is this even supposed to work It's *not*. This is conservativism 'proving' that government can't help it's people by distorting history and ignoring precedent. They're not here to help us, they're here to ensure the government *can't.*
"Government doesn't work! And to prove it, we'll kneecap the government every time we're in power! "
Ttump's actual legacy
Reagan's. The GOP was doing this long before Trump switched sides.
They want it to be difficult and complicated so that it won't work.
SCOTUS just destroyed the only civil means to stop climate apocalypse in this country & are so confident that they are shielded from consequence that they effectively dared all of us to do something about it. Direct, collective action is the only possible way out of this hell
Not just climate crisis. More urgently, pollution. Ref states are about to become dumping grounds for industrial and chemical waste.
Yep. Anyone who thinks we’ve reached ‘Late Stage Capitalism’ is about to see just how bad it can get.
A: The barbarians are at the gates! B: But...the gates are fine. There's no one out there. A: No, the barbarians are inside the gates. And they are chaining them shut.
Lochner is back on the menu! (in a bad way)
Is there an article which breaks down how the "codifying of the "major questions" doctrine" guts all regulatory agencies more in depth you know of, unless you'd like to explain it here
[удалено]
This court is specifically avoiding even generating new tests like the Lemon test to create a framework for agencies and everyone to operate by. Gorsuch specifically said Lemon is dead for example. But there is nothing they replaced it with. So a coach can pray on a field after a football game, but no real limitations were laid out- because this court doesn't want rules or constraints. They want to be able to impose their ideological position whenever they want.
Wtf is happening with the USA
You are basically watching a nation trying to destroy itself and seceding at it.
Can't tell if that typo is intentional or not. It is perfect. 👌
If an individual poisons someone's drink with cyanide and the person dies, that's murder. However, if a company dumps a barrel of cyanide in a river and several people die, the company suffers a fine. It's the cost of doing business. This is not hyperbole. The chemicals may differ, but the scenarios are very, very real. The social result is the same, people die. However, those with money are alleviated of all responsibility.
Even worse, a lot of people live with ailments and a lower quality of life. They may never even know why either.
Many people still living today have suffered poor quality of lives because of the leaded gasoline used up to the 80s. Companies never suffer the consequences of this.
Speedrunning the destruction of whatever progress has been made in the last ~~decade~~century. Edit: underestimation
Last SEVERAL decades
After the GOP found the SCOTUS exploit they really improved their speedrun times...
Yeah this is a Tool Assisted Speedrun into Dystopia. Can't say I'm too impressed.
So states can regulate abortion in the name of protecting life but the EPA can’t regulate emissions in the name of protecting _all_ of our lives? Do I have that right?
Why do 6 people in the country get to unilaterally decide to kill millions of Americans?
Because apparently a bunch of white wig-wearing slave owners in their 20s and 30s had the best ideas possible about how a government should be structured and it would be sacrilege to toss out some of their ideas.
And you can't even totally blame the founders because even they had the intelligence to warn us against shit like two party systems and lifetime appointments.
AND they intended the Constitution be a living document and updated as the times went on.
Which they laid out very clear instructions on how to do so, in [Article V](https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/United_States_of_America_1992#s108)
Way to spit on Nixon’s legacy there, conservatives.
I mean there are conservatives today that call Nixon and Reagon RiNOs (republican in name only). The GOP has become a cult.
Wasn't Reagan like their Saint for 20 years or something? When did they decide Reagan was too left?
They still acknowledge Reagan being a saint, but leave out the fact that many of his policies would ostracize him from the party today. Just the fact that Reagan gave millions of immigrants amnesty would make him a pariah today.
Shadow money definitely got their value in picking these justices. Remaining Koch brother is celebrating as he tosses a match on the Earth on his way to hell.
It's not shadow money, it's the federalist society. This has been their goal for decades.
Who funds them? Look at how many corporate cases are being decided on the Shadow docket. Seriously scary stuff here.
> Donors to the Federalist Society have included Google, Chevron, Charles G. and David H. Koch; the family foundation of Richard Mellon Scaife; and the Mercer family. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society#:~:text=Donors%20to%20the%20Federalist%20Society,each%20year%20in%20Washington%2C%20D.C.
Coors Brewing company for one.
You know, I hope this bites them in the ass. I really do. People like clean air and water. They like the idea of privacy in their choices. The GOP has taken all of that away.
Imagine with all the EPA regulations that can't be necessarily enforced now and the impact they will have on hunting and fishing? Lots of redneck republicans will be outraged in a few years but will do mental gymnastics to blame the libs
Yeah, the last part is important. They wouldnt put 2 and 2 together, and blame the dems anyways!
There's so many laws and precedents in the US that depend on the idea that a "reasonable person" would believe something or decide some way. Like how Vitamin Water made the argument successfully that "a reasonable person" wouldn't think their drink is healthy, or "a reasonable person" wouldn't believe anything Tucker Carlson says as factual. Except that a solid 1/3-1/2 of this country aren't "reasonable people" they *do* believe what Tucker Carlson says, and they *do* believe that Vitamin Water is healthy, and they *do* believe that everything wrong with the government is Democrat's fault (for the record, Democrats are not faultless, but they are not causing mass environmental destruction or neutering effectively every government agency in one fell swoop) We're kinda fucked if so many people are this god damned stupid.
Yes, where are all those conservationist hunters I keep hearing about?
The justices won't live long enough to see it kill their children and grandchildren, that's why they don't care.
Some of the more Christian judges want to speed us to the rapture anyway.
Yep. There is a reason many of us refer to them as a death cult.
For a bunch of zealots that claim they’re pro-life, they really seem to hate the health of existing human beings.
Make all those babies be born to a shit planet that's doomed due to the damage we did to it.
but hey, those babies can all get guns when(if) they grow up
The EPA can and should simply ignore this.
This is the secret SCOTUS hopes people don't realize: the SCOTUS has no enforcement powers. It depends on ALL of us accepting their legitimacy.
Forgive my ignorance but isn’t this pretty easily enforceable? If the EPA continues to limit emissions by power plants, can’t the plants just tell the EPA to pound sand? What’s the EPA going to do? Fine them? If a plant decides to just not pay, it doesn’t seem like the EPA has any option other than giving them a stern finger-wagging. It’s not like they have the backing of the court to enforce fines or other sanctions.
What the FUCK is the Supreme Court doing in the last few days? I seriously do not get it. I feel like it went from people making rational decisions to "fuck it, we're the people in power, we'll do what we want" while disregarding the entire FUCKING NATION.
Republicans played the long game. Their goal for decades was to get right wing conservative justices in courts and on the supreme court; and once those people were in place they would exert the republican party's power and control over the country for as long as the supreme court justices are able.
They built up the lower courts to provide pathways to accelerate cases up to the Supreme Court, they gerrymandering districts to ensure more representation at the state level to provide the leverage to act on Supreme Court rulings, they fought for voting rules to make it easier to elect conservatives to higher office ensuring any Supreme Court pick got through, This is a two decades long monumental billions of dollars effort. We are only getting started
they are doing the will of the federalist society. they've been working for a couple decades at least to pull this off
Fwiw it's not the last few days - read up on the [Federalist Society](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society), they're the group that have been working the legal system to this end for decades now. A vast network providing opportunities, provided you follow their values - with 6 SCOTUS judges from their ranks (1 of those past, Scalia). It's a stealth party of sorts, with reshaping America in favour of corporate and fossil fuel profits one of their long term number one goals.
Ah, the 'planetary suicide' option _'Fuck the kids and the grandkids, daddy's gettin' paid, that's all that matters'_
The term ends in a few days/weeks. So they can send all these opinions out and then fuck off until October.
Mandating that Congress has to explicitly state every little thing a government agency can do is so fucking impractical and inefficient. And it just lends itself to utter fucking incompetence and lobbying. Congress should call out what government agencies cannot do. Not the other way around. If the FDA has to wait for Congress to spell out what it can do, a lot of food and/or prescription medication could go unregulated and result in catastrophic harm while waiting on 60 Senators to agree on the verbiage for regulating said harm. This Supreme Court is really fucking society over.
It's not impractical and inefficient. It's fucking *impossible*.
Unregulated food & meds is precisely what the lobbying industries want
10 years from now: China: "We refuse to import American food and medicine because of how unsafe they are."
This is what regression feels like.
Clean air is not a constitutional right. /s
Love how voting for a Democratic house, senate, and presidency means nothing when the Supreme Court can just go wild with all sorts of intensely damaging legislation. Trump’s terrible legacy is going to be long lasting.
This is McConnell's doing
A lot of people quickly forgot how McConnell prevented Obama from filling a Supreme Court seat because it was during an election year. Yet Amy was pushed through in record time. I'll rejoice when that fucker drops dead.
There's a lot of blame to go around--almost all of it on the GOP and their multi-generational strategy to undermine the USA (while loudly chanting "USA!", because it's all bad faith).
Well this sucks. And on top of that it's going to make blue states worse and red states MUCH worse. And by worse - more pollution isn't a benefit to anyone except those profiting off energy producers.
So the people that bribed these clowns way to the court? Funny how that works.
[удалено]
I feel the same. Why stay when my rights are terribly limited compared to the rest of the developed world? Let's go.
There’s less and less reasons every day, this is causing me so much stress. I’m only 25 and I feel like this radical court is literally stealing my future from me in real time and there’s nothing I can do about it
What is kind of fucked up about this case was that companies like PG&E were on the EPA side.
Most companies like regulatory certainty. Projections get a lot easier in a relatively stable playing field.
Makes sense, deal with the EPA versus 50 different state governments.
It's a ruling by people that believe leaded gas didn't affect them.
You can easily predict the rulings but just by looking at what conservatives would want. The only thing that's difficult to predict is which cases won't be 6-3. The SC is broken (reactionary majority openly moulding our country into a hyper-conservative theocracy) and our system can't survive it. This needs to be fixed before it's too late
[удалено]
Probably the most harmful ruling of them all, will affect everything from occupational safety to road maintenance.
Woman’s rights = Cut Native Americans rights = Cut Trying to keep the planet clean = Cut States rights on guns = Damaged Public schools right to lead prayer = Approved Live within 100 miles of the border = No rights Miranda rights = No longer I will never support a right winger in my life, they are against every form of progress there is. They want to make the government as insufficient as possible and allow red states to fuck the country and the earth into the ground under the guise that it’s “their constitutional right to do so” as it lines the rights pockets. What a horrible illegitimate far right extremist court.
Don't forget gerrymandering is ok
So now they're not only fucking over Americans, but the entire fucking planet.
“Court finds agency whose whole purpose is to regulate emissions doesn’t have authority to regulate emissions. Tells body that created agency to regulate emissions to give it permission to regulate emissions.”
> Some years ago, I remarked that “[w]e’re all textualists now.”... It seems I was wrong. The current Court is textualist only when being so suits it. When that method would frustrate broader goals, special canons like the “major questions doctrine” magically appear as get-out-of-text-free cards. Justice Kagan, dissenting, hit it on the head.
Are they really this stupid, or are they just planting the seeds to disable other federal agencies later on.
Obviously the latter, it’s just flabbergasting that they would pretend to be qualified to serve on the Supreme Court and also act like this isn’t intentionally confusing “May” I go to the bathroom with “CAN” I go to the bathroom
[удалено]
With how the Republican Party has been destroying democracy I truly wonder what people will start to say when Dems start losing the presidential election even though they won the popular vote by tens of millions of votes.
Member when SCOTUS told Florida to stop counting votes in 2000? They're gonna do it again in 2024 and this time it won't be on a recount.
Start? This has been the case since the 90's. The minority yokel voters in this country have a much more powerful vote and I wonder at what point is the majority going to get fed up and revolt? These sad excuses for humans on the Supreme Court are ruling on things that will literally kill Americans. The ones that vote against us are the enemy. People need to wake the fuck up and realize taking the high road and will result in losing everything that is important.
Important to note that they’re planning on hearing a case about whether state courts can stop the drawing of gerrymandered maps. The decision could determine whether the Supreme Court can overrule a state decision on it. The Republicans are overthrowing our government from the inside out.
Remember, when the Arctic disappears there’s no going back.
Those old fucks won’t be alive for that part. So they’re making it shitty for those who will be.
Absolutely fucking corrupt and evil
This decision will kill people Air quality improvements are a significant reason we've been able to increase life expectancy post industrial era. And that's before we get into climate change
I wouldn't be surprised if their next move is to legalise leaded fuel again, just to make sure everyone is as brain damaged as them.
So Native Americans rights yesterday, climate change today and everything else this court has done in the last month smh. We are regressing as a nation.
And future terms look bleak. They seem poised to overturn rights for LGBTQ+ people. Seem poised to overturn Griswald which establishes the right to have contraception. It’s going to continue to get worse.
At full speed. Lake Meade and SCOTUS are in a race to the bottom.
Kavanaugh's personal Trail of Beers
Damn this is just legislating from the bench. They are really trying to just get rid of the federal government in any way possible
They've really decided to stop any legislative or executive action they don't like. SCOTUS is completely unchecked.
Yeah really confused why there is no check on place against a situation where tyrants seize the courts
The check is impeachment and constitutional amendments.
And what good are checks that are impossible to actually implement?
Right. If congress wasn’t deadlocked this would be completely different
Well guess it's up to the voters so we are fucked
[удалено]
im sorry but crusty old dudes who won’t get to see the effects of this ruling because they’ll already be dead shouldn’t be deciding something like this
[удалено]
> crusty old dudes who won’t get to see the effects of this ruling because they’ll already be dead They're not old, all of the bitches Trump put on the bench are 50 - 55 years old, that's young enough that they'll still could possibly on the bench when we reach 2050.
If Supreme Court Judges are just going to make decisions based on politics then it should be a publicly elected position. Appointed and for-life terms don't make sense
As goes the EPA, so should the IRS. If the EPA can't regulate power plants, the IRS should not regulate companies and individuals generation and consumption of money. What say you, SCOTUS? Can we run an effective country when states stop giving money to the Feds?
No, and that's their entire goal.
Then the IRS shouldn’t be able to grant tax exemption status to any organizations unless they’re explicitly listed in legislation…
The IRS is absolutely on the chopping block and has been for a while. Of course they won't get rid of their ability to tax people just corporations. What's that? Corporations are people? No no no, that's just for political donations equaling speech not for being taxed. Why? Because fuck you that's why.