Re:Supreme Court overrules Chevron deference [pdf]
by adastra22 on Friday June 28, 2024 @04:02PM
(#40824665)
I don’t think it will be useful to either of us to continue this thread, so I am bowing out. Wish you the best.
Re:Supreme Court overrules Chevron deference [pdf]
by cscurmudgeon on Saturday June 29, 2024 @02:26AM
(#40828255)
> Sure there is; it's the Federal Trade Commission Act, which says "Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful."
Not really. Do you think "Unfair" has an objective definition? Just saying something is unfair won't make it automatically or objectively unfair. Non competes are not deceptive.
It may be covered but the point it is not logically implied by the text you quoted.
Compare that with the objectivity of this (still contains a lot subjectivity):
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2013-title42/html...
Sure there is; it's the Federal Trade Commission Act, which says "Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful."
They, through the regulatory process, correctly determined that non-competes are unfair methods of competition.
> But prior to Obama’s administration, it was really rare the agencies would enforce policies with no basis in the law whatsoever.
Obama's administration changed the makeup of the court with his loss of Scalia's seat, failure to pressure RBG to resign, and Trump's subsequent picks; that's what changed. The regulatory setup long predates his presidency. Chevron fell because the court got extra conservative members, nothing more.