Pirate's Cove

In case you didn’t know, we are awaiting a Supreme Court decision on a climate crisis (scam) case. I have a feeling that it might not be a win for either side, because Congress, unfortunately, writes laws that are very broad and give Executive Office agencies wide latitude to apply them to issues they were never meant to address. Consider the Obamacare contraceptive mandate. Contraception appears nowhere in the bill. So, where did the mandate come from? No one knows. But, HHS may have used tiny language to do it, from Ocare bill or another bill. Regardless, this case has made the Statists very concerned….you know, the same people who called Donald Trump a Fascist

How SCOTUS’ upcoming climate ruling could defang Washington

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling this month hobbling the Biden administration’s efforts to rein in greenhouse gases — but its impact could weaken Washington’s power to oversee wide swaths of American life well beyond climate change.

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.

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.

It’s one thing to take writing in a Congressional bill to make a small rule. And this is Congresses fault for failing to make legislation targeted. They too often want the Big Bill!!!!!, which leads to this garbage. Doing a massive rule is something entirely different, as that is something Congress needs to explicitly pass. Those in favor of Central Government Planning are worried that the ability of Los Federales in the Executive Branch, which is tasked with enforcing law, not making it up, will be reigned in.

Supreme Court climate case might end regulation

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in the coming days or weeks that could curtail EPA’s ability to drive down carbon emissions at power plants.

But it could go much further than that.

Legal experts are waiting to see if the ruling in West Virginia v. EPA begins to chip away at the ability of federal agencies — all of them, not just EPA — to write and enforce regulations. It would foreshadow a power shift with profound consequences, not just for climate policy but virtually everything the executive branch does, from directing air traffic to protecting investors.

If it’s a resounding win for West Virginia it won’t stop the agencies for writing regulations, it will simply require them to write rules that are explicitly required per Congressional law. Ocare gave HHS the ability to determine what is considered full time work and which size companies are affected. It’s in the bill. Even though Congress should have determined that. What if the Trump admin had determined that Ocare only affects companies with a million employees? It would have been legitimate and authorized.

This is making the Statists very, very concerned.