Wiki_QA_PREVIEW__@@

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
To view this on the COS website, click here [[https://conventionofstates.com/news/scotus-moving-in-the-right-direction|scotus-moving-in-the-right-direction]]


----

====== SCOTUS - Moving in the Right Direction ======


Sign of the times - SCOTUS takes a step toward shrinking big government.


----

|On Friday, June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court overturned the Chevron Doctrine.\\ \\ If that doesn’t mean much to you, you’re probably not alone.  But if you’re tired of having to live your life according to what a bunch of regulatory agencies decide is “best”, this is big.  Huge!  \\ \\ Allow me to explain:\\ \\ It seems that back in 1984 the US Supreme Court decided some laws passed by Congress were too vague.  The language was open to numerous interpretations.\\ \\ So rather than kicking things back to the law makers for clarification, or interpreting the law themselves - which is what the judicial branch was meant to do - they gave that task to the agencies that were affected by those laws.  Because who better to decide how to keep things in check?  After all, they’re the experts.  It was kind of like asking prison inmates to write a code of conduct for their incarceration. \\ \\ To be honest, I had no idea what the Chevron Doctrine was.  So, like all good Googlers, I looked it up.\\ \\ [[https://search.brave.com/search?q=what+is+the+chevron+doctrine&summary=1&summary_og=75059b403bea165b4c70bb|Here’s what I found:]]\\ \\ //The Chevron doctrine …is an **administrative law principle** that **requires federal courts to defer to a federal agency’s interpretation** of an ambiguous or unclear statute that Congress has delegated to the agency to administer. This principle was established in the 1984 U.S. Supreme Court case Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.//\\ \\ * //The doctrine is based on the idea that federal agencies, with their expertise and accountability to the executive branch, are better suited to interpret ambiguous statutes than federal court...//\\ * //The Chevron doctrine has been a cornerstone of U.S. administrative law, **allowing federal agencies to implement regulations and policies without excessive judicial** **interference.**                             //\\ * //The doctrine has been criticized by some as giving agencies too much discretion and potentially leading to arbitrary or capricious decision-making …//\\ \\ This was The Supreme Court's decision 40 years ago.\\ \\ \\ **A couple of things jumped out at me here:**\\ \\ “Administrative law” – isn’t **Constitutional Law** **still the law of the land**?\\ \\ Courts - whose job it is to interpret laws - are **required** to defer to the “experts”;\\ \\ and my favorite - **without excessive judicial interference** – because we wouldn’t want those pesky courts getting in the way.\\ \\  \\ \\ The founders of the Constitution established 3 (not 4) branches of government:\\ \\ ** Legislative Branch** - Congress writes the laws;\\ \\ **Judicial Branch** - the courts interpret the laws\\ \\ **Executive Branch** – The President is Commander in Chief of the military; “by and with advice and consent of the Senate” appoints various Officers of the United States; and **“he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”.  **\\ \\ There is no Regulatory Agency Branch.  There is no Constitutional provision for these agencies to interpret the laws.  \\ \\ The three branches keep an eye on each other and form a checks and balances system.  This format is meant to avoid government overreach.  \\ \\ Luckily, in writing the Constitution, the founders knew some slippery son of a gun would wiggle in there somewhere and change things.  Like a group of Progressive politicians rejecting the Constitution and replacing it with Administrative Law.  That’s why they included [[https://conventionofstates.com/article-v-of-the-u-s-constitution|Article V .]]\\ \\ Overturning the Chevron Doctrine will have a trickle-down effect on most regulations currently in place.  This is a good start toward shrinking government.  We must continue the fight.  It’s time to enact the Article V process.  \\ \\ In fact, [[https://conventionofstates.com/|Convention of States Action]] is working on just that.  Have you [[https://conventionofstates.com/take_action|signed the petition]] yet? With forty years of hindsight, today's Supreme Court overturning the Chevron Doctrine was a big step.  It’s a sign that we're moving in the right direction.  But there's much more to do.  \\ \\ Why not [[https://conventionofstates.com/take_action|explore how you can get involved]] – even if you don’t see yourself marching and carrying signs, everyone has something they can offer. Be a part of the solution today!|
|


----

|  __Page Metadata__  ||
|Login Required to view?  |No                  |
|Created:                 |2024-07-02 19:16 GMT|
|Updated:                 |2024-07-03 14:15 GMT|
|Published:               |2024-07-03 04:00 GMT|
|Converted:               |2025-11-11 12:03 GMT|
|Change Author:           |Julie Holly         |
|Credit Author:           |                    |