Dissident Politics: News bits: Attacking the administrative deep state; Govt. attacking privacy; Christianity attacking secularism

A NYT opinion (not behind a paywall, I think) by law professor Kate Shaw (Cardozo Law School) discusses the current attack on the entire federal government in a case now pending at the USSC:

This USSC term largely revolves around a single blockbuster question: Will our government retain the capacity to address the most pressing issues of our time?

That’s what’s at stake in a group of cases involving the power, capacity and in some instances the very existence of federal agencies, the entities responsible for carrying out so much of the work of government. .... But the administrative power cases pending before the court this term involve issues that touch the lives of every American.

They involve the government’s ability to study and approve the safety and efficacy of the drugs we take; its power to protect consumers, enforce the securities laws and safeguard the nation’s waters; and ultimately to respond in innovative ways to the climate emergency. The outcome in these cases may even affect more obvious hot-button issues like guns and abortion.

It’s been clear for some time that several conservative justices harbor deep skepticism about the administrative state.

Under the court’s current conservative supermajority, the project of dismantling the administrative state is already well underway. This has largely happened through the court’s use of what it terms the major questions doctrine, a novel principle the court has wielded to prevent agencies from taking actions of significant political or economic importance if they cannot point to explicit authorization from Congress.

Using this doctrine, last year the court kneecapped the Environmental Protection Agency by limiting its ability to enforce the Clean Air Act in West Virginia v. E.P.A. It further curtailed agency power this year in Biden v. Nebraska, when it struck down an initiative by the administration’s Department of Education that would have canceled significant quantities of student debt.

Perhaps the most important case this term is Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, scheduled for oral arguments in early 2024, in which the plaintiffs are asking the court to overrule the best-known case in administrative law, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council. In Chevron, the court announced a rule that directed federal courts to defer to reasonable agency interpretations of statutes they administer. That is, if a statute is silent or ambiguous on a particular question, courts aren’t supposed to write on a blank slate about what the statute means — if an expert agency has already provided an answer to the question, and it’s a reasonable one, the court is supposed to defer to that interpretation.

In the 1984 Chevron case itself, the court deferred to a Reagan-era E.P.A. rule challenged by environmentalists, and the case once counted conservative stalwarts like Justice Scalia and Justice Clarence Thomas among its defenders. (In his “dull” lecture, Justice Scalia explained that the rule of Chevron “accurately reflects the reality of government” and “adequately serves its needs.”)

But Chevron has become a bête noire [something hated or strongly disliked] in conservative circles.

I warned about the authoritarian radical right attack on the Chevron Defense before. If that legal doctrine falls, almost all of federal government will grid to a halt. People will feel a lot of pain. Some will be killed as regulations fade away and free markets running wild and butt naked takes care of us instead of the government doing it. Vast power will flow from us to brass knuckles capitalists and enraged, foaming at the mouth Christian nationalist freaks.

Keep your eyes on the flow of power.

OT: I wrote to Shaw and asked her to stop calling elite Republican politicians, including judges, conservatives. They are not conservative. They are deeply corrupt, pro-dictatorship radical right extremists. I suspect she won’t change her labeling, but at least I did a little by pinging her mind.

Quote Investigator: Currently, QI has located no substantive evidence that Edmund Burke employed this saying. Burke died in 1797, and he received credit in 1981. The earliest match located by QI appeared in the 1850 book “Elementary Sketches of Moral Philosophy” by Reverend Sydney Smith. This posthumous work was based on lectures delivered by Smith at the Royal Institution of London between 1804 and 1806. Boldface added to excerpts by QI:

It is the greatest of all mistakes, to do nothing because you can only do little: but there are men who are always clamoring for immediate and stupendous effects, ....

Fact check tip: Always check to see if a quote is properly attributed. I've made that mistake several times, but not any more (I hope).

________________________________________________________________________

The federal government does not take privacy rights seriously:

US govt pays AT&T to let cops search Americans' phone records
– 'usually' without a warrant

At least get a court order before mining Hemisphere Project data, says Senator

A senator has complained that American law enforcement agencies snoop on US citizens and residents, seemingly without regard for the privacy provisions of the Fourth Amendment, under a secret program called the Hemisphere Project that allows police to conduct searches of trillions of phone records.

According to Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), these searches "usually" happen without warrants. And after more than a decade of keeping people — lawmakers included — in the dark about Hemisphere, Wyden wants the Justice Department to reveal information about what he called a "long-running dragnet surveillance program."

"I have serious concerns about the legality of this surveillance program, and the materials provided by the DoJ contain troubling information that would justifiably outrage many Americans and other members of Congress," Wyden wrote in a letter [PDF] to US Attorney General Merrick Garland.

AT&T declined to answer any specific questions about Hemisphere, but a spokesperson told The Register: "To be clear, any information referred to in Senator Wyden's letter would be compelled by subpoena, warrant, or court order."

If AT&T is lying, it's reasonable to believe that nothing will be done about this. Garland is worse than worthless. He does not care much about us, our rights, democracy, or the rule of law.

________________________________________________________________________

This video discusses Awana (Approved Workmen Are Not Ashamed). The speaker describes Awana as a nationwide Christian nationalist child indoctrination cult. The Wikipedia page for Awana is bland and probably written by Awana to make it seem innocent. It certainly was not written by Ellie, the speaker in the video. She was raised by devout Christian parents and went through various Christian nationalist experiences for children. She has rejected Christian nationalism and posts videos on YouTube about her childhood experiences and other things.