|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 30, 2022, 10:56 AM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 4, 2013
Location: Western slope of Colorado
Posts: 3,679
|
SCOTUS EPA ruling and the ATF
With the courts ruling stating in part (and im paraphrasing), that Agencies dont get broad reaching rule making abilities, how does that affect upcoming ATF “rules” on things like pistol braces making guns into SBR’s?
The ruling says that its up to congress to make laws that have broad reaching effects on citizens. What do our legal eagles on this forum have to say? |
June 30, 2022, 11:02 AM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,450
|
I'll admit to having only skimmed it.
I'm not reading it as a broad reversal. The Court isn't saying the EPA couldn't restructure the power grid and economy if that's what Congress had authorized. It's saying that we are looking at this part of the law the EPA says gave it a sweeping power long ago, and just now it has discovered that all along it had the power to restructure the power grid and economy. We read what Congress passed and don't see how they could have meant that. Quote:
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php Last edited by zukiphile; June 30, 2022 at 11:32 AM. |
|
June 30, 2022, 11:59 AM | #3 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,820
|
Quote:
And, in the EPA case, they ruled Congress did not. Therefore, it is up to Congress to either directly govern, or to write a law that specifically authorizes the EPA to make rules. How is this going to affect the ATF and its policies? I have no clue. Something to be very wary of, is accepting what the various commentors and "analysists" (from any side) tell you what SCOTUS rulings "mean". And especially the headlines many of which are drastically inaccurate fear mongering, and even outright lies. One I saw today about the EPA case ruling was "Supreme Court rules against the planet!" As I see it, the court ruled against the govt NOT FOLLOWING THE RULES THEY WROTE, in that case, and nothing more. Now, how other agencies react, what they do, and don't do, to prevent them being in a case the court rules on, is up to them, their directors, and ultimately the "big guy" in the White House.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
July 20, 2022, 07:51 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
I was hopeful that SCOTUS would take the obvious step of completely throwing out the Chevron deference. They did not, but perhaps the next case will be the one. Fortunately, the many tentacles of the feds mean that there is no shortage of active litigation that the court can choose from.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/chevron_deference |
July 21, 2022, 04:09 AM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 5,312
|
Repulican Senator Ben Sasse from Nebraska has said on several occasions that it is advantageous, (and also reprehensible), for folks in Congress to pass off their responsibilities to the various agencies or even to the president.
He makes the point that if you don't do anything you don't have to answer for anything and lots of folk in government are more than happy to pass the buck. |
|
|