Four justices appeared absolutely determined, on Wednesday, to overrule one of the most consequential Supreme Court decisions in the Court’s entire history.

Chevron v. National Resources Defense Council (1984) is arguably as important to the development of federal administrative law — an often technical area of the law, but one that touches on literally every single aspect of American life — as Brown v. Board of Education (1954) was important to the development of the law of racial equality. Chevron is a foundational decision, which places strict limits on unelected federal judges’ ability to make policy decisions for the entire nation.

As Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said during Wednesday’s arguments, Chevron forces judges to grapple with a very basic question: “When does the court decide that this is not my call?”

And yet, four members of the Supreme Court — Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh — spent much of Wednesday’s arguments in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce speaking of Chevron with the same contempt most judges reserve for cases like Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the pro-segregation decision rejected by Brown.

The open question is whether the Court’s four most strident opponents of this foundational ruling can find a fifth vote.

None of the Court’s three Democratic appointees were open to the massive transfer of power to federal judges contemplated by the plaintiffs in these two cases. That leaves Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett as the two votes that remain uncertain. To prevail — and to keep Chevron alive — the Justice Department needed its arguments to persuade both Roberts and Barrett to stay their hands.

    • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      its been quite painful watching a lot of progressive action replaced with regressive action due to conservative billionaires poisoning the minds of half the country

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yes, that’s part of being flawed, that billionaires can buy elections. That and a 2 party system driven by first past the post, which is not really democracy either.

          • Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            Corruption is absolutely an important issue, but it’s not enough to fight corruption to fix a democracy that breeds corruption.
            It’s absolutely a valid cause, and may help the other things getting fixed too down the road. It seems to me many democrats are ready for a better democracy, but not so much for the elected politicians.

            • SteveCC@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Thanks.

              Corruption - dark money, etc is just one part of what Represent Us is working on. Many think that the push for RCV is the most important.
              Ending first past the post elections might end a lot of corruption and party domination.

              • Buffalox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                I wish all the best for all who work to protect and improve democracy in USA, I have always loved USA, but it’s very difficult to love a country that elect Trump for president.
                And I believe it only happened because there are only 2 options, which removes balance from the debate, and silences minority interests among many other negative impacts compared to a better functioning democracy.