These CNN Election Fraud Shots and Chasers Are Suitable for Framing (Shifting Goalposts...
Spin and Grin: Mayor Mamdani Tells Jon Stewart DSA Members Disagree on Abolishing...
MS NOW’s Molly Jong-Fast Mad Trump Is Using Fact Non-Citizens Are Voting to...
Hot Take: We Know About the Noncitizens Voting in NJ *Because* Our Elections...
Jennifer Welch: Homeschooling Is 'Inherently Patriarchal' and a 'Huge Push of the Fascist...
Mehdi Hasan Explains to Javier Bardem How Spain's World Cup Win Was a...
Why the ‘Conservatives Are Incurious’ Smear Is Pure Projection
ActBlue Fraud Hits El-Sayed Campaign: 88yo No-Computer Granny ‘Donated’ $150K (and 47 Time...
Rep Brandon Gill Introduces Bill to End Birthright Citizenship for Children of Illegal...
Fifth Circuit: Illegal Aliens Have No Constitutional Right to Roam Free During Removal...
'It Never Happens' — Until a Mexican Illegal Sexually Abused and Murdered a...
Fifteen-Year Pro-Hamas ‘Forever Student’ at Columbia to Be Deported to Jordan
Ratio Alert! Geraldo Rivera's Attempt to Make the NJ Voting 'Glitch' About Trump...
Unable to Arrest Netanyahu, Mamdani Leaves It to New Yorkers Whether They Want...
All This Dem Lying About Noncitizens Voting Being a Nonexistent Problem Is Aging...

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