politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Huh?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Trade_Commission_Act_of_1914
https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/statutes/federal-trade-commission-act
The literal text of the FTC Act says:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-388/uslm/COMPS-388.xml
They are doing exactly what Congress told them to do.
Just the begining after striking down Chevron Deference. Sure, common sense says that is well within the purview of the FTC granted by Congress. But now, without chevron in place, the court is going to say anything that is not word for word directed by congress, is outside of an agency's jurisdiction.
While we're on the same side here and you're otherwise right, it WAS word for word directed by Congress!
There's literally no possible reading of the FTC Act passed by Congress that doesn't explicitly and word for word say the exact opposite of what this brains replaced with bribes fucking kangaroo court says in this gargantuan miscarriage of justice!
Yeah, that was my take too. The language in the Act seems pretty straightforward to me, and the judge's statement seems to directly contradict it (but IANAL).
Maybe he's trying to split hairs over the FTC not having direction to regulate how employers deal with employees, and saying that doesn't fall under "commerce"?
Probably, but that's still absolute lunacy from the standard of objective reality and probably shaky as hell from a purely legal one too.
Might as well have ruled that the IOC aren't allowed to make decisions regarding the Olympics for all the sense this makes 🤦
You're absolutely right, it's absurd and that's the point. For the GOP court to say the FTC can do that, they will expect Congress to pass a law saying "the FTC has the authority to ban non-compete agreements of every kind" but that's dumb and defeats the purpose of executive agencies, we agree. But that's the point. Congress will rarely if ever be that specific, so anyone can argue a law is not what they meant and the agencies have no deference.
The end goal is agencies are powerless and Congress is paralyzed, so the judiciary has all of the authority to decide what everything means.
The supreme Court overturned Chevron. There will be more things just like this as a result. They arbitrarily stripped a ton of power from regulators.
Words mean whatever the people in powersay they mean, and unless and until the rest of us are sick enough to actually do something about it... Well... Nothing changes if you don't do something different.