Hacker News Reader

The judicial system aside, it was a deliberate legislative choice (in many countries, with the US being among the most enthusiastic) to allow the executive to unilaterally designate arbitrary entities to be bad. Every system of this nature eventually gets turned against people you yourself consider good. I don’t get the surprise, frankly.

View on HN

Yeah, back during Trump's first term I was hoping Congress would rein in executive power a bunch as he is prone to do stuff like this, didn't turn out that way unfortunately...

Now the main constraint on executive power seems to be due process and habeas corpus.

For what it's worth, it seems like the actual law that would be involved (so the deliberate legislative choice) does not allow Hegseth to do what he says he wants to do: https://www.justsecurity.org/132851/anthropic-supply-chain-r...

So it's not just that there's be a transfer of power to the executive (there is), there's also straight up executive overreach.

tl;dr the Major Questions Doctrine is something SCOTUS has been using to decide of Congress has given wide latitude. For big questions, Congress needs to be explicit. They used this in the IEEPA and tariffs case to end the arbitrary levies. Tariffs were not mentioned and are a big issue. Similar story here with claiming broad interpretation on an important issue.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com