{"id":2067140,"date":"2023-10-14T07:45:04","date_gmt":"2023-10-14T11:45:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-second-challenge-to-administrative-state-powers\/"},"modified":"2023-10-14T07:52:32","modified_gmt":"2023-10-14T11:52:32","slug":"supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-second-challenge-to-administrative-state-powers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-second-challenge-to-administrative-state-powers\/","title":{"rendered":"Supreme Court to Review Second Challenge to Administrative State Powers"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">20<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fsupreme-court-agrees-to-hear-second-challenge-to-administrative-state-powers%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2067140&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><h2>The Supreme Court Takes on Second Case That Could Limit Bureaucracy&#8217;s Power<\/h2>\n<p>The Supreme Court has made a significant decision to hear a case that\u2063 could potentially challenge a legal doctrine supporting a federal rule requiring fishing companies to pay for government monitoring of their catch. This move could have\u200b far-reaching implications for\u200b the balance of power among Congress,\u200b executive agencies, and\u200c the judiciary.<\/p>\n<p>The case, Relentless Inc. v. Department of Commerce,\u2062 will be argued in January \u200d2024 alongside a similar case\u200c called Loper Bright Enterprises \u2064v. Raimondo. The court&#8217;s ruling could potentially curtail the authority of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/the-justices-people\/\" title=\"Justice's People\">modern \u2063administrative state<\/a>, which <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/new-york-city-pushes-the-limits-of-green-policies\/\" title=\"NYC pushes green policies to the max.\">critics \u200dargue<\/a> has become an illegitimate fourth branch of \u200dgovernment.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<h2>Related Stories<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>\n<h3><a href=\"http:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/us\/supreme-court-takes-up-major-case-that-could-roll-back-power-of-federal-government-5232839?ea_src=author_manual&#038;ea_med=related_stories\">Supreme Court Takes Up Major Case That Could Roll Back Power of Federal Government<\/a><\/h3>\n<p class=\"text-comp-caption\">5\/1\/2023<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<h3><a href=\"http:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/us\/groups-urge-supreme-court-to-overrule-pro-bureaucracy-rule-that-aids-administrative-state-5420607?ea_src=author_manual&#038;ea_med=related_stories\">Groups Urge Supreme \u2064Court to Overrule\u2063 Pro-Bureaucracy Rule That Aids \u200cAdministrative State<\/a><\/h3>\n<p class=\"text-comp-caption\">7\/25\/2023<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The case challenges the Chevron deference doctrine, established in 1984, which grants executive agencies deference in interpreting statutes unless Congress has \u2062explicitly stated otherwise. Critics\u200c argue that\u2063 this doctrine\u200c gives unelected regulators excessive power \u200dto shape policy beyond the intentions of Congress.<\/p>\n<p>The petitioning fishing companies \u2063argue that the federal rule requiring them to pay\u200b for human \u200dmonitors aboard their vessels is unjustified and \u200cexceeds the authority granted by\u2064 the \u200dMagnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. They compare it to \u200dmotorists being forced to pay for state troopers to monitor \u200ctheir speed.<\/p>\n<p>The\u2062 Supreme Court&#8217;s decision to hear this case has been welcomed \u200dby the \u2063petitioners&#8217; attorneys, who hope to reverse the lower courts&#8217; rulings and eliminate the bias in favor of bureaucracy that the Chevron deference\u2064 doctrine imposes on citizens.<\/p>\n<p>The case has attracted \u2064attention due to \u200bits potential impact on\u200b the \u200bbalance of power and the ongoing\u2062 debate over the\u2064 role of regulatory agencies in serving the public interest.\u2064 The court&#8217;s ruling\u2064 could reshape the relationship between \u2063Congress, executive\u200c agencies, and the judiciary, and\u200d redefine the limits \u2064of bureaucratic authority.<\/p>\n<p>It remains\u200c to be seen how the Supreme Court will rule on this case, but its \u200bdecision to \u200btake it on indicates \u200da willingness to reexamine the \u200bChevron deference doctrine and potentially limit the\u200c power\u2064 of the administrative state.<\/p>\n<p> <\/p>\n<h2> What\u2062 potential impact could the \u2062Supreme Court&#8217;s ruling in these \u2064cases have on the \u200dregulatory landscape and the relationship between \u200bthe bureaucracy, Congress,\u200c and the\u200c judiciary<\/h2>\n<p><span>  Deral \u200dGovernment<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<h3><a href=\"http:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/life\/fishing-rules-could-change-in-gulf-of-maine-as-environmental-conditions-shift-5229552?ea_src=author_manual&#038;ea_med=related_stories\">Fishing Rules\u200b Could Change in \u2062Gulf of Maine as Environmental Conditions Shift<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/li>\n<li>\n<h3><a href=\"http:\/\/www.theepochtimes.com\/critics-warn-major-new-rules-for-fishing-waterways-could-leave-fishermen-floundering-5210950?ea_src=author_manual&#038;ea_med=related_stories\">Critics Warn Major New Rules for Fishing Waterways\u2063 Could\u2063 Leave Fishermen Floundering<\/a><\/h3>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The\u200b legal doctrine at \u2064the heart of the case is\u2064 known as the &#8220;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/mccarthy-calls-on-supreme-court-to-rein-in-administrative-state-in-upcoming-case\/\" title=\"McCarthy urges Supreme Court to limit administrative state in upcoming case.\">chevron \u200ddeference<\/a>,&#8221; which <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-second-challenge-to-administrative-state-powers\/\" title=\"Supreme Court to Review Second Challenge to Administrative State Powers\">gave federal \u200dagencies broad discretion<\/a> in interpreting ambiguous laws. Under this doctrine, courts have often deferred to an \u200bagency&#8217;s\u200d interpretation of \u200ba\u2062 statute, as long as it is \u2064reasonable. However,\u2062 critics argue that this has led to an\u2063 overreach of bureaucratic power, enabling\u2062 unelected officials to create and enforce regulations without sufficient oversight from Congress or \u200bthe judiciary.<\/p>\n<p>Relentless Inc., a\u2064 fishing company located\u200b in the Gulf of \u2064Mexico,\u2064 and Loper Bright Enterprises, based\u200c in the\u200c Gulf of Maine, \u2064are\u2062 both challenging the federal rule requiring them to fund government\u2063 monitoring of \u2062their catch. They argue that the rule is an unconstitutional delegation\u2063 of power to executive agencies and that \u2062it \u200bviolates their \u200bright to due\u2064 process.\u200c If successful, this case\u2064 could potentially invalidate similar \u200dregulations \u200dand limit the authority of\u200c executive agencies.<\/p>\n<p>These cases come at a critical time when the role of bureaucracy in shaping policy \u2062is \u2062being\u2064 widely debated. The growth of the \u200badministrative state \u2062over the past century has raised \u2062concerns about\u200c the erosion of \u2063democratic accountability and the concentration of power in the hands of unelected bureaucrats. Critics argue that executive agencies have taken on quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial roles, effectively making\u2062 and enforcing laws without the necessary checks and\u2062 balances of the other branches of government.<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court&#8217;s decision to hear these cases indicates a willingness to reexamine the \u200bdeference \u200cgiven to executive agencies\u200c and to revisit the balance of power between the branches\u200c of government. If the \u2063court decides to limit the Chevron \u200ddeference or strike it down \u2063altogether, it would have a significant impact on the regulatory landscape and\u2063 the relationship\u200c between the bureaucracy,\u2063 Congress, and \u2062the judiciary.<\/p>\n<p>Proponents of the \u2063Chevron\u200b deference argue that it is\u200d necessary to allow agencies \u200cto interpret laws and respond\u200c to evolving circumstances without being\u200d overly constrained by the courts. \u2063They contend that agencies have the expertise and \u2064knowledge required\u200b to make informed policy\u200b decisions, \u2063and that requires some level of deference from the judiciary. However, opponents claim that this\u200d deference\u2064 has gone too far, granting agencies excessive discretion and allowing them to bypass\u200b the\u200c traditional \u2063legislative process.<\/p>\n<p>The outcome \u200dof these cases may have profound implications for the future of administrative law and\u2064 the relationship between the \u2062branches of government. It\u200c could reshape the powers\u2062 of executive agencies, establish new standards for judicial\u200b review of \u200bagency actions, and redefine\u2063 the \u200bbalance of power \u200damong the branches. Legal experts \u2064and scholars are closely watching these cases and await the Supreme Court&#8217;s ruling \u2064in anticipation of\u2062 the potential impact\u200b on the bureaucratic power and \u200bdemocratic governance.<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately,\u2063 the decisions in Relentless Inc.\u2063 v. Department of Commerce and\u2063 Loper Bright Enterprises\u200c v. Raimondo have the \u200bpotential to redefine \u200cthe boundaries of bureaucratic power and\u200c restore a proper \u200dbalance between democratic \u2062accountability and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/josh-hammer-after-dobbs-what-comes-next-for-the-conservative-legal-project\/\" title=\"Josh Hammer: After Dobbs, What Comes Next for the Conservative Legal Project?\">agency discretion<\/a>. The Supreme Court&#8217;s involvement\u2062 in these cases reflects\u2064 a growing concern over the concentration of \u2064power in the hands of \u2062executive agencies and the \u200dneed to ensure checks and balances within the administrative \u200bstate. \u200cThe\u2063 ruling will undoubtedly shape\u200d the future of administrative law and have far-reaching implications for the relationship\u2063 between Congress, executive agencies, \u200dand the judiciary.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Supreme Court will review a case challenging a federal rule that requires fishing companies to cover the cost of government monitoring of their catch. The decision to hear Relentless Inc. v. Department of Commerce was made on Oct. 13 in an unsigned order. This could potentially limit bureaucratic power.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":168,"featured_media":2067141,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[543],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2067140","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-epoch-times"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/cndimages.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/IMG_2758-scaled-1.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2067140","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/168"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2067140"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2067140\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2067141"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2067140"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2067140"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2067140"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}