Hacker News Reader

Comment by dbcurtis | Hacker News Reader

Ummm… I assume you are complaining about the Loper Bright decision that ended “Chevron deferrence”, correct? You do realize that the Chevron decision was to give Dick Cheney his way on environmental questions, yes?

Loper Bright says that regulators can’t change rules on a whim as they go along, and ignore/exceed congressional authority. What part of that do you have a problem with?

View on HN

For 40 years or so laws granting regulatory authority to federal agencies were written with the understanding that Chevron Deference was the law of the land. Now those laws grating regulatory authority are going to be considered too vague. What will happen is that regulatory agencies will be thwarted in their duty to protect the public. Where the court is headed is that they will require a level of specificity in writing laws that grant regulatory authority that is impractical. Read what the dissenting opinions were and see where they think things are headed.

I think the reality is that regulations will become more “sticky”. There will be a motivation to get it “right” the first time. Overall, I am happy to see an end to capricious reinterpretation with every change of administration. I don’t expect that we will see more specific legislation.

There wasn’t a capricious change with every administration. You can point to isolated examples but not some over arching, wide ranging scheme. Your view about it being a good thing that Chevron is gone will not age well. You will be like the Texas ranchers that vote Republican and complain about oil companies polluting their water.

I presume the GP is frustrated by Congress's inability to do anything, and at this moment considers "Just trust the executive branch to be acting in good faith" as an acceptable solution.

I suppose they probably way overestimate the odds that we won't have a brand new executive branch with wildly different priorities and definition of reality in 5 months.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com