Just a huge and pretty abstruse topic, Dis. Here is an article -- a primer -- on the Court's deference jurisprudence:dislaxxic wrote:Kavanaugh’s Court begins its inevitable power grab with Kisor v. Wilkie
Comments from the barrister crowd?
..
https://www.americanbar.org/publication ... _doctrine/
These guys -- Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Thomas -- would probably tell you that they are not unreasonably hostile to the administrative state or the bureaucracies placed in charge of stuff like the environment, as such. What they are hostile to, they might say, is the disconnect between the regulator (say, the EPA) and the words of the democratically elected body whose job it is to fashion the laws. "Deference" doctrines like Chevron and Auer and Seminole Rock allow the bureaucracies to perform functions and fill in blanks spaces that, frankly, Congress may never have considered, doesn't have time to consider, could never reach legislative consensus on, etc. So the decline of deference will mean a Costanza-like shrinkage of the administrative and regulatory state -- because we know, don't we? that Congress is unlikely to step up its game.
Anyone else have any thoughts on this? Not my area of interest or expertise by anyone's stretched imagination.