Following recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court that limited the authority of federal agencies, critics on the progressive side raised concerns about favoritism towards “big business,” “corporate interests,” and the wealthy. However, it is important to acknowledge that individuals without significant resources often face challenges dealing with overbearing bureaucrats who overstep their boundaries.
In a significant case, the Court rejected the Chevron doctrine, which mandated judicial deference to a federal agency’s interpretation of ambiguous statutes. The majority argued that this rule, established in 1984, created uncertainty about the law and allowed the executive branch to overstep its judicial role.
While some viewed this decision as a win for corporate interests, the case involved family-owned fishing businesses objecting to unauthorized regulatory fees. Justice Neil Gorsuch highlighted the impact on vulnerable individuals, such as a veteran denied disability benefits and an immigrant facing deportation due to agency rule changes.
Another ruling mandated jury trials for individuals accused of securities fraud, criticizing the Securities and Exchange Commission’s internal proceedings as unfair. The case highlighted the plight of individuals like accountant Michelle Cochran, who faced penalties without due process.
Gorsuch emphasized the importance of constitutional safeguards for all individuals, regardless of their popularity or resources, warning against unchecked agency power. The article concludes with a reflection on the need to ensure fair treatment for all in the face of expanding bureaucratic authority.
© Copyright 2024 by Creators Syndicate Inc.
