Ask HN: Are the recent Supreme Court rulings affecting your work? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Are the recent Supreme Court rulings affecting your work?

4 pointsgigatexal9 comments

Look this might not be HN appropriate and if so please let me know and I’ll delete it. Or the mods can.

We talk here a lot about new tech, new companies, burnout, etc — and I’m finding that the direction the US is going by giving presidents — in my opinion — far more authority than warranted and thereby shielding former president Trump from any consequences of Jan 6th, storing top secret information in his bathroom, or other election meddling is putting the US on course to becoming far more authoritarian and not the place I grew up in or the free and fair place that my immigrant parents flocked to for a better life.

I worry about Trump retribution and the implications it will have. I worry about project 2025’s desires to move many more federal officials into such a way that they become yes-men and yes-women to the president-king. Coupled with the SC’s decision to kill chevron deference such that agencies can’t rely on experts and scientists to fill in the details of vaugeries in the law — what will that do for clean water or airline safety or anything else we expect government to do in holding big business accountable and keeping us safe?

And this is how it relates to HN: it’s affecting my work a bit. The anxiety of it all is something I worry about.

When it comes time to work I — like a psycho? — compartmentalize it all and put it away but it’s still there.

Is anyone else feeling this way? What are you doing to address it if any?

The only way out is realizing that elections are not the only way to engage in democratic societies.

That means organizing: at work, neighborhoods, churches etc to protest against the upcoming attacks that will come. History has shown over and over again that elites don’t share power with the people out of the goodness of their hearts but because they fear the alternative (revolution). Anything else is BS.

I feel so much a sense of hopelessness given that the courts seem to have moved to the right, legislatures are increasingly gerrymandered etc, etc, such that I wonder: “will grass roots organizing really change anything?” I guess the same could be asked about voting but I will sure as shit vote and get involved even if my contribution is a very very small thing.

That’s why I’m saying we shouldn’t care about voting anymore.

The solution at this point is getting to the streets, mass strikes. Civil disobedience.

Your understanding of these issues seems entirely colored by incendiary headlines and the communities around them.

If you want a deep dive into Supreme Court rulings and what they actually say, give the Advisory Opinions podcast a chance. Seriously.

I'm not sure yet that I agree with the decision on presidential immunity on official acts, but I can understand the reasoning behind it. Ultimately it categorized what sort of presidential act is immune from future consequences and what is not, and punted the decision back to the court. It never said that any of Trump's actions he's on trial for were considered official acts.

The other two decisions - Chevron and the Jarkesy/SEC one - literally weakened executive power and strengthened the legislative branch and the right to fair trial. This seems counter to your point. I mean, how do you even defend the SEC side that you shouldn't have a right to a jury trial before significant financial penalties are levied on you.

Chevron allowed every new president place new administrators in charge of the regulatory state and reinterpret guidance on a whim every few years. This wrecked chaos on stable business-making. Chevron made sense originally, but today it's been abused by every president. I can't imagine a better outcome than to force congress to make laws that set a clear course for regulation.

I cannot emphasize this enough: Chevron being overturned weakens executive power. Full stop.

The court isn't nearly as ideologically split as you think. Erlinger v US had Kavanaugh, Alito, and Brown Jackson on the same side in dissent, which leaves you a clue about who the other liberal justices sided with.

Brown Jackson, a Biden appointee, sided with the majority in support of the Jan 6th defendants on the obstruction case, while Barrett, a Trump appointee, was in the dissent.

If the majority of what I told you was new information to you, what does that tell you about the journalists who produce the information you consume? My solution: stop consuming news, and start consuming critical content, so you at least start to understand the reasoning behind the decisions that you feel so inflamed by.

Project 2025 is a wish list in the form of a very boring book from Heritage Foundation. Have you actually read it, or have you been told about what's in it? I disagree with the vast majority of it, but it's not an anxiety inducing, democracy ending document as headlines make it out to be. It's a policy proposal wishlist. Speaking of Chevron, Proj 2025 becomes way harder to execute with Chevron overturned, as it relies on the unchecked power of the administrative state to succeed.

Fair enough. And I’m Alexis open to a news podcast.

But given how mired in bickering Congress is do you really want MTG or Boebert to be writing legislation when instead an agency could be protecting water ways?

And you don’t think the presidential immunity ruling will lead to further unchecked power and maybe another J6 if Trump loses?

s/Alexis/am

Yes I want congress to write, debate, and vote on legislation. I don’t want to abide by a dictatorship of an unelected administrative state.

What congress exists to do that? In my experience the last few have done precious little. I agree that this is the ideal but reality says it’s very much not the case. Congress spends probably more time campaigning to stay in office than they do debating bills.

And I’d be surprised if you were surprised how lobbyists and special interests actually write the bills. Congressman and women are just the cheer leaders for these efforts.

Actually I take umbridge with the “unelected administrative state”. Do you think your Congress rep does all the work? Do they do any? (Probably not). It’s their staffers that do. It’s the lobbyists and special interest bodies that craft the legislation.

So then why hate on the executive branch appointed heads of agencies? When voting for a candidate you’re voting for the party they represent. Ostensibly a candidate from Party A will put folks aligned with Party A into government agencies to help the government run.

“Unelected administrative state” smh.

That is literally their job, so, yes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com