this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
450 points (99.1% liked)

News

23296 readers
4289 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The Supreme Court said Wednesday it will consider whether to restrict access to a widely used abortion drug — even in states where the procedure is still allowed.

The case concerns the drug mifepristone that — when coupled with another drug — is one of the most common abortion methods in the United States.

The decision means the conservative-leaning court will again wade into the abortion debate after overturning Roe v. Wade last year, altering the landscape of abortion rights nationwide and triggering more than half the states to outlaw or severely restrict the procedure.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Why even have regulating bodies? Chevron deference cannot go away. This is how the right continues to "dismantle the administrative state," to use their own words.

This is real bad.

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world -5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Chevron deference is problematic because it allows non elected officials to establish rules, in practice laws, with insufficient oversight.

Don't get me wrong I like when the FDA limits how much rat poop can be in ceral. But it shouldn't enable organizations to say something that had previously been known as lawful is now a felony, and to imprison citizens for that.

Chevron deference should be limited to fines on commercial businesses.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Stfu. Honestly do you have like a baby's understanding of government regulation? Do you think keeping the rat poop out of cereal and the other ten million regulations that keep you safe daily are possible without specialized bodies of administrative agencies regulating thousands of different industries, administering tens of thousands of specialty statutes? You cannot draw a line between "making things illegal that used to be perfectly legal" and keeping the rat poop out of food. Rat poop food was "perfectly legal" and still would be without a Chevron deference, we'd be sitting around waiting for Congress to act and meanwhile we'd all die of plague. What are you, a Libertarian, wants to die from plague?

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Re read what I said. My point is that Chevron is inappropriate when applied in criminal matters, as opposed to civil matters.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

I don't see the distinction, in your post or in fact. Administrative action is neither criminal or civil, but regulatory. Through its enabling statute and it's own regulations, an agency may avail itself to criminal or civil remedies. Only a prosecutor can prosecute criminal charges in federal court.

Why can Congress delegate "civil" but not "criminal" matters? It can either delegate or not.

Agency functions are rulemaking, adjudication, investigation, enforcement. I think pretty much every federal agency has some level of function for each, each with it's own requirements for due process. Agencies aren't neatly packaged. Got a couple examples of what you're talking about criminal versus civil regulatory action?

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

These corporations bake those fines into "the cost of doing business." Fines aren't effective on their own. Also, we need experts to be the ones who determine where the line is, before we can even talk about consequences for crossing it.

This country would descend into chaos within days if we didn't have people who are career experts in their respective fields working in regulatory agencies.

No fucking shot should those people need to be elected, that's absurd. We need people who have studied that shit and have an intimate knowledge of the subject matter informing our laws, not Joe Shmo that won a popularity contest because "he's the kind of guy they'd like to have a beer with." Even if they have the best intentions, it's impossible to be an expert in everything.

Also, the heads of those agencies are politically appointed positions, and at least on a state level, they often turnover with each new administration. So it's not completely disconnected from people who are elected.

Edit: dumb fuck libertarians ruining this country.

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The issue is that these agencies can have their heads appointed as a way of politically weaponizing them.

For example appointing a new FBI head who would lead to a new ruling that unborn fetuses are people who would be protected by homicide laws.

This skirts the legislative process to establish new laws. And aside from waiting until the next election the only recourse is commenting on the mater during a comment period.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works -1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

That's not how the FBI works. They enforce the laws passed by the legislative branch.

[–] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I know this isn’t the main point of this conversation but the idea that the FBI follows or has at any point since it’s inception followed the law in any meaningful sense is frankly hilarious.

The FBI does whatever the hell it wants.

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

And federal agencies interpret the laws under Chevron. They can redefine previously accepted interpretations to regulate new conduct.

Here's a link to the federal register where you can comment on proposed reinterpretations of the suggested by the FBI.

https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies/federal-bureau-of-investigation