logoalt Hacker News

refurb02/21/20251 replyview on HN

> They said Congress cannot delegate that amount of its plenary power to the executive.

That wasn't the conclusion of the decision that overturned Chevron. You can read the decision here.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf

Overturning Chevron only impacted the purview of the courts. It changed nothing with regards to Congress delegating power to the executive - Congress can continue to do so.

All it does is make ambiguity in the law the responsibility of the courts to decide, not the executive.

But Congress can still pass a vague law that says "a new agency X will regulate this product in order to protect public safety". The executive can then interpret what "protect public safety" means, but if challenges, the courts won't defer to the agency for the interpretation any more.


Replies

camgunz02/21/2025

Well, maybe more embarrassingly I read your post backwards. But Thomas' concurrence is basically "only Congress can legislate".

I will say it's super unclear how our government works now. SCOTUS is like "sure, go ahead and delegate" but what they mean is "only as much as we let you... looking at you Democratic administrations". MAGA has--through half statements and gaslighting, made it clear that the only principle is that they have power and their opposition doesn't. If that means the Executive is powerful when it's Republican and weak when it's Democratic, well he who saves his country breaks no law.