The Supreme Court Needs To Stop Unelected
Bureaucrats From Making Up Laws
The Federalist,
by
Jared Roberts
Original Article
Posted By: PeterWolosin,
9/13/2021 11:56:47 AM
A new Supreme Court brings new hope to reeling in unchecked federal power. For the last few decades, the Supreme Court has allowed Congress to delegate unchecked power to unelected agency officials, who are mainly part of the executive branch. The executive branch has thus legislated through unelected officials and latched onto powers not granted to them via the Constitution.
The most recent example is President Joe Biden’s mandate that large employers require their workers to be vaccinated or test for the virus weekly.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Califedup 9/13/2021 12:04:12 PM (No. 913238)
Amazing that the writer is expecting the Supreme Court to save us from the communist death democrats. Denial of reality runs strong in this writer.
The Supreme Court is as corrupt, criminal, and venal as is the rest of the federal government, congress, the military, the medical profession, on and on and on. They all hate us and view us as the enemy. Conduct yourselves accordingly.
Wake up.
17 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Jesuslover54 9/13/2021 12:18:04 PM (No. 913253)
Sorry, no standing.
12 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
skacmar 9/13/2021 12:22:22 PM (No. 913264)
There has been hope in some recent decisions where the court reminded Congress that it was their responsibility to write and pass the laws. Edicts from the President with rules made up by unelected partisan bureaucrats. It is easy to escape responsibility for unpopular decisions when you let the unnamed faceless bureaucrats write the rules and call it a mandate rather than Congress put their names on unpopular yes votes because their party demands it.
12 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
SkeezerMcGee 9/13/2021 12:32:07 PM (No. 913272)
It's unlikely the Supreme Court will be able to effectively control the powers and jurisdictional scope of federal agencies.
Why? There are two major reasons.
First: Congress avoids its responsibliyty regarding politically sensative isssues by delegating such decisions to federal agencies, including allowing them to create rules punishable by criminal penalties. In other words: to create crimes.
Second: Federal agencies always strive to expand their authority and the scope of the subject matters they regulate. Sometimes it takes decades before their illegal actions are checked by courts of law.
A good example of this is the 1972 Clean Water Act (CWA). Congress punted by allowing the Environmentaly Protection Agency to determine the scope of its jurisdiction by allowing the EPA to define "waters of the United States." The EPA interpreted the CWA to include interrmittent streams, playa lakes, prairie potholes, sloughs and wetlands as "waters of the United States." Not until 2006, in Rapanos v. United States, did the US Supreme Court hold that the term "waters of the United States" "includes only those relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water 'forming geographic features' that are described in ordinary parlance as 'streams[,]... oceans, rivers, [and] lakes.'" However, since then the EPA has continued to try to expand to expand this definition.
14 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
BarryNo 9/13/2021 12:45:57 PM (No. 913282)
needs too? Maybe. It would be better if we made the politicians stop because we said to... you know, "Stop right now of die!"?
Courts are founded on people who accept and respect laws to curtail the greed of supposedly rare individuals, who won't. We don't have that now. We are in Wild West Mode. If we want this crap to stop, we're going to have to get off our tushes and stop it.
8 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
stablemoney 9/13/2021 1:11:52 PM (No. 913321)
The SC would first have to stop itself from making up law. I do not have any admiration for anything the SC has ever done.
11 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
red1066 9/13/2021 1:22:10 PM (No. 913334)
Start with the EPA.
8 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
anniebc 9/13/2021 1:44:38 PM (No. 913361)
What hope? I have no hope whatsoever in the SC. NONE!
Amen! poster #6!
9 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
WhamDBambam 9/13/2021 2:26:12 PM (No. 913388)
You jest.
1 person likes this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
cor-vet 9/13/2021 3:31:47 PM (No. 913431)
Are we talking about the #1 unelected bureaucrat, the moron- in- chief!
4 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
bighambone 9/13/2021 4:03:58 PM (No. 913457)
The Obama-Biden DACA administrative Amnesty is a perfect example, it is certainly unconstitutional, as it is written in the US Constitution that the immigration and naturalization laws must be passed by Congress. The DACA administrative Amnesty was never passed by Congress. It is the Obama-Biden unconstitutional DACA administrative Amnesty the has served as as the principle encouragement for people all over the world to send huge numbers of their their foreign children, many unaccompanied by friends or relatives, but with paid Mexican cartel people smugglers to the US borderline, believing once their children illegally cross into the USA that Biden and his leftist and socialist crew will allow them to stay in the USA and be covered by a new DACA Amnesty that Biden says he intends to create.
4 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
danu 9/13/2021 4:23:24 PM (No. 913466)
SCAMUS and the Derp State-together at last- one paw soiling the other.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "PeterWolosin"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
Comments:
This is our last hope, and it will come down to the Supreme Court making it happen. America's last chance. Let's hope Trump's nominees - Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett - do the right thing when the time comes.