Not entirely. CIA was authorized by Congress. But, the ruling can be applied to both the agency and their powers. Both have to be authorized by Congress.
Congress authorized the CIA to exist but not to make rules and laws on its behalf, imho this is why this ruling does slice and dice the Farm considerably.
ATF, CIA, DoE, EPA, .. We're already out of order, but I would agree on the ATF being next, but the TSA, NIH, NSA, and the IRS need to follow closely behind.
This could give us the oppertunity to kill it. But it could get dicey if they claim the ability to use emergency powers was authorized. Wed have to prove it wasnt a real emergency
The section you quoted is nothing more than hyperbole from the dissenting opinion (leftists). The decision did not "strip the EPA of it's authority" - it stated the EPA exceeded the authority that it had been granted by law. I'm not a lawyer but what the opinion seemed to state was that by enacting new rules that did not actual spell out a "system" to reduce emissions, but rather a cap and trade scheme, the EPA exceeded their authority granted under the Clean Air Act. The SCOTUS shut down their grift scheme (cap and trade) - no wonder the leftists are so mad about this decision.
"When Congress seems slow to solve problems, it may be only natural that those in the Executive Branch might seek to take matters into their own hands. But the Constitution does not authorize agencies to use pen-and-phone regulations as substitutes for laws passed by the people's representatives."
That alone ""SHOULD"" lead into massive investigations of corruption within the EPA, and IF Charges are brought, beyond Firings, of the personnel, then yeah, the loss of agents alone should gut the agency just enough to make it ineffective, and impotent.....
People will be quitting or begging for transfers.....
But the only question before the Court is more narrow: whether the “best system of emission reduction” iden- tified by EPA in the Clean Power Plan was within the authority granted to the Agency in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. For the reasons given, the answer is no.
They are specifically addressing the Clean Power Plan.
There's a secondary point you bring up here that I'd encourage everyone to look at when they get time. Whenever there's a 6-3 ruling that involves Roberts doing his effing job that leaves the 3 liberals to write the dissent, their prose is disturbingly laughable.
Many of you will be shocked (I know I was) at how laughably emotional many of their dissenting pieces are. Often there's very little reference to any kind of precedent, just whining. This isn't always the case, but it is the case a disturbingly large amount of time.
Kagan and Sotomayor are well known for their decisions being emotional and not having any legal substance whatsoever. How they became judges, let alone Supreme Court justices is beyond me
As we have seen many times: "Our rights do not stop at your feelings!" I read the opinions a while ago and this one is pure SJW all the way and NOT covered in any way by the Consitution that I can see.
Similar to the gun rights case where the court did not throw out gun licensing as unconstitutional, rather, it only threw out requiring a showing of a specific need in order to get a license
Sure, but there are lots of other ""Rules"", that they simply invented out of thin air, and pushed on the States and Public....
I'm hopeful that the Catalytic Converters and Diesel Exhaust Fluid{literally Piss and Distilled Water}, are two of those things that can be 100% tossed out....
It'll drive the climate Change Glowies wildly insane, and within 1 year, we will all benefit from larger Plant Produce and Production.....
Capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible “solution to the crisis of the day.” New York v. United States, 505 U. S. 144, 187 (1992). But it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme in Section 111(d). A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body. The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is reversed, and the cases are remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. (Page 31)
They never do. They set precedent under which lower courts must decide other cases with the same essential question. I.e., abortion isn't a right guaranteed by the Constitution, which doesn't even prohibit federal financial support for it. It will also have an effect on law making. Wheels of justice turn slowly. Sorry, but the quickest method to the solution is the political realm, which in our system should mean the people.
"And what would you do, Roper? Knock down all the laws to get to the devil? And when the devil turned round on you, how would you stand in the wind that blew then, the laws all being flat"? (Thomas More, Man for All Seasons...from memory so may be inexact.)
Exactly. But if you point that out prepare to be down voted. According to some this is the second coming of the 4th of July and all agencies are going to be shut down. Not by a long shot. Now we get to wait years to see if any other cases can use this as a precedent. It's NOT what we were hoping it would be.
I don’t know. It may not take years. Depending on how midterms go. And then 2024. I think we have a lot more winning to do. The main thing is here is the precedent has been set. 3-4 letter agencies are targeted. It’s like chess. And a major piece was moved, devastating the opponents end game. It’s cool.
Let's go alphabetical, ATF then Dept. of Education
Will it include the CIA?
Not entirely. CIA was authorized by Congress. But, the ruling can be applied to both the agency and their powers. Both have to be authorized by Congress.
Can Congress also withdraw authorization of the CIA making it defunct and defunded?
Congress authorized the CIA to exist but not to make rules and laws on its behalf, imho this is why this ruling does slice and dice the Farm considerably.
same with IRS unfortunately
All of them were authorized by Congress. What is at stake is the agencies independent rule making power.
I think the Cia was an executive order. Time to rescind
ATF, CIA, DoE, EPA, .. We're already out of order, but I would agree on the ATF being next, but the TSA, NIH, NSA, and the IRS need to follow closely behind.
What about the NIH - and the jab mandate?
Does this KILL the Jab Mandate?
This could give us the oppertunity to kill it. But it could get dicey if they claim the ability to use emergency powers was authorized. Wed have to prove it wasnt a real emergency
Can we just ask for proof of an actual virus having been isolated from the wild?
ThTs not impossible
IRS !!!!
The section you quoted is nothing more than hyperbole from the dissenting opinion (leftists). The decision did not "strip the EPA of it's authority" - it stated the EPA exceeded the authority that it had been granted by law. I'm not a lawyer but what the opinion seemed to state was that by enacting new rules that did not actual spell out a "system" to reduce emissions, but rather a cap and trade scheme, the EPA exceeded their authority granted under the Clean Air Act. The SCOTUS shut down their grift scheme (cap and trade) - no wonder the leftists are so mad about this decision.
"When Congress seems slow to solve problems, it may be only natural that those in the Executive Branch might seek to take matters into their own hands. But the Constitution does not authorize agencies to use pen-and-phone regulations as substitutes for laws passed by the people's representatives."
Very.
That seems like a shot specifically at Obama right there :D
That alone ""SHOULD"" lead into massive investigations of corruption within the EPA, and IF Charges are brought, beyond Firings, of the personnel, then yeah, the loss of agents alone should gut the agency just enough to make it ineffective, and impotent.....
People will be quitting or begging for transfers.....
That’s a quote from Kagan’s dissent.
The bottom of page 6 has the court’s opinion:
They are specifically addressing the Clean Power Plan.
There's a secondary point you bring up here that I'd encourage everyone to look at when they get time. Whenever there's a 6-3 ruling that involves Roberts doing his effing job that leaves the 3 liberals to write the dissent, their prose is disturbingly laughable.
Many of you will be shocked (I know I was) at how laughably emotional many of their dissenting pieces are. Often there's very little reference to any kind of precedent, just whining. This isn't always the case, but it is the case a disturbingly large amount of time.
Kagan and Sotomayor are well known for their decisions being emotional and not having any legal substance whatsoever. How they became judges, let alone Supreme Court justices is beyond me
I guess the answer to that question is corruption
Well, Obama did that, so...
As we have seen many times: "Our rights do not stop at your feelings!" I read the opinions a while ago and this one is pure SJW all the way and NOT covered in any way by the Consitution that I can see.
Truth.
Similar to the gun rights case where the court did not throw out gun licensing as unconstitutional, rather, it only threw out requiring a showing of a specific need in order to get a license
Sure, but there are lots of other ""Rules"", that they simply invented out of thin air, and pushed on the States and Public....
I'm hopeful that the Catalytic Converters and Diesel Exhaust Fluid{literally Piss and Distilled Water}, are two of those things that can be 100% tossed out....
It'll drive the climate Change Glowies wildly insane, and within 1 year, we will all benefit from larger Plant Produce and Production.....
So have they narrowed the focus of the decision so much that there won't be the domino affect we hoped for with the other agencies? Edit:
u/sleepydude gave me some perspective in another post.
https://greatawakening.win/p/15IXygwp7g/so-correct-me-if-im-wrong-but-be/
They never do. They set precedent under which lower courts must decide other cases with the same essential question. I.e., abortion isn't a right guaranteed by the Constitution, which doesn't even prohibit federal financial support for it. It will also have an effect on law making. Wheels of justice turn slowly. Sorry, but the quickest method to the solution is the political realm, which in our system should mean the people.
"And what would you do, Roper? Knock down all the laws to get to the devil? And when the devil turned round on you, how would you stand in the wind that blew then, the laws all being flat"? (Thomas More, Man for All Seasons...from memory so may be inexact.)
"IT MUST BE DONE BY LAW...," Donald Trump.
Exactly. But if you point that out prepare to be down voted. According to some this is the second coming of the 4th of July and all agencies are going to be shut down. Not by a long shot. Now we get to wait years to see if any other cases can use this as a precedent. It's NOT what we were hoping it would be.
I don’t know. It may not take years. Depending on how midterms go. And then 2024. I think we have a lot more winning to do. The main thing is here is the precedent has been set. 3-4 letter agencies are targeted. It’s like chess. And a major piece was moved, devastating the opponents end game. It’s cool.
Yeah it feels like the SC just put a bunch of delegated power back in the hands of Congress right before the red wave.