• JollyG@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    This does not extend to the Judicial branch. It only applies to the Executive branch. You can read the EO yourself to see that fact.

    This is bad because it is trying to exert control over independent agencies, and pretty stupid because there is something like 5000 final rules and proposed rules in the Federal Register last year, so if this were seriously implemented, the AG and POTUS would just sit in teams meetings for the rest of their terms while potential rules get discussed.

    This is bad because it undermines the independence of federal agencies, it does not actually impact the Judicial system however.

    • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      This is bad because it undermines the independence of federal agencies, it does not actually impact the Judicial system however.

      I assume that independent agencies would primarily look to judicial precedents for guidance on interpreting the law, so the order is stripping the judicial system’s influence even if it’s not stripping its explicit authority.

      • JollyG@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Federal Agencies make their own rules. That is how the Federal government works. Congress makes a law, usually with enough ambiguity that the federal agency charged with enforcing the law has to make specific interpretations. They make those interpretations, usually under some process that requires public notice and comment, and that interpretation becomes the law in effect. That interpretation can be challenged through a lawsuit, at which point a Judge could overrule the interpretation establishing a new interpretation through judicial review. Until recently, the courts gave a lot of deference to the agency’s rule making process because rules are usually written by a combination of lawyers at the agency, and subject matter experts. So, for example if a new law regulating factory safety was passed, and the enforcement of the law was delegated to OSHA, then OSHA lawyers and subject matter experts (like doctors or engineers working for the agency) would make a rule and solicit public comment.

        Nothing about this EO can, or pretends to. usurp the power of the judicial system. The AG can make any interpretation they like, it can still be challenged in a Court. And after the Chevron court case, these rulings are easier than ever to challenge.

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      4 days ago

      those independent agencies are set up that way specifically to avoid being controlled by a president.

    • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      4 days ago

      It still says that executive branch employees should just follow orders, which is not compatible with the rule of law.

      • Melody Fwygon@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 days ago

        This 100%.

        The more valuable and critical a government employee knows they are; the more effective they can be by doing this.

        Everyone in any federal agency who is resisting and who is being ordered to do something they object to should be falling to this maliciously compliant default to the maximum extent they can afford to do so. Gum up the works; extend out projects, stretch deadlines out, passively resist every step of the way and insist that every possible reasonable rule be followed to it’s exact and literal definition…even if it’s not common practice or expedient.

        Exhaust the servants of the tyrant of their every resource; run these liaisons ragged; overload them with petty questions and minor, but critical, decisions; especially if they’re bogged down. If you can make them quit or get fired by the cheeto in a non suspicious way; all the better. Making it impossible to keep a liaison in your department will keep them guessing if they keep quitting on their own due to extreme stress and overwork.

        Anybody who is a Political Appointee should be considered a hostile co-worker automatically and kept out of every loop possible. Make them battle for every inch of information or status updates and give as little information as you can while only answering explicit questions. Bonus points if management is in on the game; and can ping-pong any information requests around violently across all the various managers and supervisors who each only leak a tiny tidbit of information.

      • Psythik@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Tell me about it. Every time I bring up Trump and all the damage he’s doing to the country outside of social media, people look at me like I’m a raving lunatic. Most Americans literally have no clue what’s happening.

  • flop_leash_973@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 days ago

    One of these days you would think one of the other powerful people in one of the other branches of government would get upset at this stuff.

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    And there we go, officially, nobody can say we have our democracy anymore. Officially destroyed.

    • Doug Holland@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      4 days ago

      Nah, this one’s just part of Trump’s endless blather. It simply can’t be done without creating so much chaos that today’s chaos would look well-organized. It’s piffle, and I’m staying focused on the real things.

  • PattyMcB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    This is extremely concerning, but let’s control the spin a bit. This is for federal employees and their job duties, as I read it. Please tell me if I’m wrong

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      What do you think those job duties entail exactly? Do you have any idea how regulatory agencies function, or are you just going to remain ignorant and pretend it’s not happening?

      • PattyMcB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        I’m just pointing out the gyroscopic level of spin in the article. No need to get upset.

    • endeavor@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Its directed at the only people who can checks and balances. Cause lefties still think guns are meanie and 2nd amendment is not made for this exact situation.

    • Camzing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      In 2018, the U.S. Code was about 60,000 pages long and contained 54 volumes. How is he going to run a country when he has to interpret all of that.

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    4 days ago

    So, my understanding was prior to 1984 if a law was unclear, the courts would get involved and clarify. However, sometimes the courts wanted something that the writers of the law didn’t want, and that thing was different from the current congress, which in of itself different from what the president wanted, which even could be different from what the independent executive branch department heads wanted.

    This all came to a head with Chevron. In Chevron, anything unclear in a congressional law that applied to a executive branch’s mission was left up to the head of that department which in a way was controlled by who the president nominated. In that way, if congress left something vague that meant the courts, congress, and the president all agreed that the head of the particular department in the executive branch got to decide it.

    This peace lasted up until Loper in the end of 2024 under Biden. In it, the Supreme court said basically “If something is unclear, it is the courts and not the executive branch” that got to interpret the law. Not wanting to overturn 40 years of regulation, the courts said “anything made under Chevron is still good, but that stops now”, most likely since they thought Biden was going to win again and they wanted to take away his power.

    Now this EO is saying “No, lol, Loper doesn’t mater. No one but the president himself (and DOGE) can interpret the law.” At least both Loper and Trump agree that THE REGULATORS can’t make new regulations. And because SCOTUS didn’t really want that job, and Trump doesn’t want to do anything, don’t expect any new regulations for the next 4 years.

    • monotremata@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      My guess is that the reason they bothered with this, rather than leaving it with the courts, is that this version would allow Trump to abruptly reverse the things that were previously decided under Chevron deference.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Is KY available at the government office or do I need to bring it with me to see Mr government?

    Also, could Mr.Government please do the DMV too? Fuck it up real good for all of us please! Fire everyone who works there, delete the data, etc. I mean “fix it” real good for us please!