- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: SCOTUS- Trump has authority to fire heads of independent federal agencies
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:14 am to Grumpy Nemesis
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:14 am to Grumpy Nemesis
quote:
Creating agencies that have effectively executive type powers that the executive can't control is no different than if they created courts that ahead Court powers but you couldn't appeal to the Supreme Court or anywhere else
You mean like laws like the APA, which regulates how the Executive can create agency policy and regulations?
0
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:24 am to SlowFlowPro
The question is when did/does Congress lose the power to structure these agencies and the corresponding processes?
They lose it the minute it goes under the executive.
They lose it the minute it goes under the executive.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:29 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This is not the same thing as execution of the agencies on their day-to-day operations, only the process in how those people are able to assume those positions.
I understand your point. I'm just saying that Congress doesn't have time to write processes for 1000s of agencies at such a detailed intricate level so that there is no room for interpretation.
If the executive stocks an agency with mutineers, its mission is not going to be fulfilled.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:31 am to LegendInMyMind
quote:
And that thread went just the same as this one
Page after page of Slo Flow Homo explaining why he knows the law better than a bunch of Supreme Court Justices?
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:35 am to TrueTiger
quote:
I understand your point. I'm just saying that Congress doesn't have time to write processes for 1000s of agencies at such a detailed intricate level so that there is no room for interpretation.
They write others laws for this (like the APA)
And a shocking number of USSC cases are cases based in APA analysis of agency action.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:36 am to Icansee4miles
quote:
Page after page of Slo Flow Homo explaining why he knows the law better than a bunch of Supreme Court Justices?
Uh...no. No ruling on the merits has even occurred to discuss.
I've also discussed the issues in play almost exclusively.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:40 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The power is being ripped away from Congress
Power to approve is legislative. Power to nominate and remove is executive.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:43 am to prplngldtigr
Dors this mean JPow can be let go?
Posted on 8/25/25 at 7:51 am to Powerman
quote:
You would have to be the dumbest person of all time to think that this is a good thing
No, you would have to be the dumbest person of all time if you think an unelected bureaucrat should be able to impede the presidents vision just because they disagree with him politically. Every person in the agency should adhere to the constitution first and foremost. If what they are being asked to do is constitutional, then they should do what their boss, the president, tells them to do. If they can’t do that, then the president, who is accountable to the voters, should have every right to replace them with someone that shares his vision.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:23 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
They're not. Congress has traditionally held this power, though, as Congress forms these agencies and sets the rules.
The problem was that there was no limiting factor on overreach until just recently.
The definition of CO2 as a pollutant is a perfect example of bureaucratic overreach.
Once these agencies are created they are free to run wild and trample rights of citizens without any debate or discourse. The USSC ruled that the Article I branch of the government can not just delegate their responsibility like that.
The senate filibuster requiring 60 votes de facto prevents any of these agencies being reined or controlled once they are created.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:34 am to SlowFlowPro
So you're saying everything Joe Blowdin did, along with Pedo Clinton, and Barry O'dumbass ,was able to be scrutinized by Congress, and none of these Dem jackasses had any more authority than Trump right?
And for anyone to have 1/2-a-million posts on this site must mean that individual must not have anything else to do, or maybe is/was never good at their so-called job to begin with............hence all the free time with no clientele.
And for anyone to have 1/2-a-million posts on this site must mean that individual must not have anything else to do, or maybe is/was never good at their so-called job to begin with............hence all the free time with no clientele.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:38 am to CIGAR_cigarillo
quote:Cut him some slack, he's working his knees to the bone under Judge Mathis' desk.
Now, give me extra fries with my order.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:44 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
They write others laws for this (like the APA)
The law provides a framework.
If you have ever worked for a large complex organization you know that below that framework are policies, procedures, guidelines, job aids, group consensus and finally, individual judgements, that answers the thousands of decisions that the framework does not cover or is ambiguous about.
All of those have enormous influence on the direction of the organization and can handicap it.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:49 am to Bandit1980
quote:
And for anyone to have 1/2-a-million posts on this site must mean that individual must not have anything else to do,
His wife hates him.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:49 am to CastleBravo
quote:
The problem was that there was no limiting factor on overreach until just recently.
The definition of CO2 as a pollutant is a perfect example of bureaucratic overreach.
Once these agencies are created they are free to run wild and trample rights of citizens without any debate or discourse. The USSC ruled that the Article I branch of the government can not just delegate their responsibility like that.
That's addressing an issue with the executive, not Congress. I'm assuming your'e referencing the repeal of Chevron, correct? Not really anything specific to do with Congress. That was pure executive overreach, which is the worry removing Congressional power in structuring the agencies.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:50 am to Bandit1980
quote:
So you're saying everything Joe Blowdin did, along with Pedo Clinton, and Barry O'dumbass ,was able to be scrutinized by Congress, and none of these Dem jackasses had any more authority than Trump right?
Trump's admin is seeking to change the power paradigm and get the executive more power than those Presidents had.
And my worry isn't as much Trump having the power, as much as it is the next DEM admin having that clear escalation in power.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:52 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:What debate? The SCOTUS has spoken.
That's the debate.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 9:54 am to Diamondawg
quote:
The SCOTUS has spoken.
It has not. No ruling on the merits has been had. I don't even know if this has gone to the appeals court on the merits yet.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 11:02 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The power is being ripped away from Congress
Depends on the agency. Congress sometimes gives power to the president to make appointments even over legislative agencies. Executive agencies are easier—there’s no real basis to say the Chief Executive can’t dismiss the heads of his own agencies.
The only tricky part is legislative agencies that don’t delegate any power to the executive. On one hand, the legislative branch generally has authority over the delegation of its power. On the other, the executive branch is in charge of enforcing the laws (even the ones where the legislative branch delegates its authority to an agency). It arguably follows that an enforcer would have the ability to dismiss/appoint (enforce) the creation/management of that agency. Obviously, USSC feels like the latter is true.
Posted on 8/25/25 at 11:18 am to SDVTiger
quote:
Dors this mean JPow can be let go?
No. The majority opinion specifically addressed that question. They said the Fed was created under an entirely different statue and this ruling couldn't be used to oust Powell.
Page 3 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News