Krystal Ball Says It's a GOOD THING There Are Fewer White Peeps Posting...
Seems IMPORTANT: Brown Classroom Where Gunman Opened Fire Belongs to THIS Teacher Teaching...
Liz Warren ALREADY Exploiting Brown Shooting to Push Gun Control and Dana Loesch...
Rashida Tlaib Claims Congress Has ALL THE MONEY to Feed and Give FREE...
Sexist, Racist Newsom Press Office TOOL DRAGGED for Literally Trashing Nicki Minaj for...
ABC Hypes Up Scary Polar Bears Study Complete With Climate Alarmism Tropes
Here's Further Proof That 'Jingle Bells' Is Racist
Sen. Patty Murray Wants Immediate Release of 'Constituent' Mauled by DHS K9
Illegal Who Entered 7 Times and Sexually Assaulted Woman Praised by Judge for...
ABC News: Sen. Mark Warner Says Type of Ammo Used in Drug Boat...
All Black Coaches Will Pay: Jemele Hill Predictably Drops a Race Card on...
MS NOW's Senior Legal Reporter Goes All-In With Narrative of Trump With Minors...
White Guilt Over Accountability: Minneapolis Shrugs at $250M Stolen from Hungry Kids
Questions Surround Mass Shooting at Brown University; Several Reported Injured
Jasmine Crockett Claims She Gets the Struggles of Farmers and Ranchers, Knows the...

Panicked Politico warns that SCOTUS could soon make it a lot more difficult for the executive branch to control 'wide swaths of American life'

Politico is sounding the alarm over an upcoming Supreme Court ruling that could threaten everyday life as we know it:

Advertisement

More from Politico:

The upcoming decision on the Environmental Protection Agency’s climate oversight offers the conservative justices an opportunity to undermine federal regulations on a host of issues, from drug pricing and financial regulations to net neutrality. Critics of the EPA have clamored for the high court to do just that, by declaring it unlawful for federal agencies to make “major” decisions without clear authorization from Congress.

The Supreme Court and several Republican-appointed judges have invoked the same principle repeatedly during the past year to strike down a series of Biden administration responses to the coronavirus pandemic. Liberal legal scholars worry that the EPA case could yield an aggressive version of that thinking — unraveling much of the regulatory state as it has existed since the New Deal.

And we wouldn’t want that! 

More:

That has implications for other major rules that President Joe Biden’s agencies are writing or defending in court, including wetlands protections, limits on car and truck pollution, insurance coverage for birth control under Obamacare, and even the Trump administration’s attempts to lower drug prices.

“A narrow reading of what the federal agencies can do is going to literally handcuff the federal government from taking action to protect Americans’ health safety and the environment,” said Lawrence Gostin, a public health law professor at Georgetown University.

Advertisement

“A narrow reading of what the federal agencies can do”? You mean, like, respecting the notion of separation of powers?

Is anyone else failing to see what the downside would be?

What Jeremy Clarkson said.

We really are cool with the executive branch’s — and federal government’s — role in our everyday lives being reduced.

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement