Anonymous goofball41 17w

Huh?

1

Anonymous #2 17w

Right, as this one was before the court struck it down. Rules and regulations from prior administrations stick around long after the Presidency they were initiated under. They remain issues effecting real people and businesses. Beyond that, the authority of the government is always a pressing issue.

1

Anonymous OP 17w

I’m aware that legislations made in one administration don’t vanish as soon as the next one begins. My point is that this would’ve perhaps temporarily disenfranchised some white employees in some instances, which would be a bad thing no doubt, but is not harm that’s anywhere near significant enough to be talked about given our current moment. It seems like you’re upset about diversity initiatives and want to complain about government overreach from the left wherever you can find it

1

Anonymous #2 17w

If you’re worried about authority of the government maybe look to the current administrations blatant disregard for the constitution

1

Anonymous #2 17w

We’re talking about administrative rules and regulations, not legislation. I am worried about that too, but the current admin has nothing to do with the facts of this case and this ruling. One bad thing doesn’t stop mattering just bc another bad thing is also happening. We can walk and chew gum. I’ve done nothing to give that impression other than talk about the wrongdoing of the last admin (which, somehow, is a defense of the current one in your mind? You seem like a partisan hack).

1

Anonymous OP 17w

And when a diversity initiative violates the law, like this one did, we should all be upset about it. No one is above the law.

1

Anonymous OP 17w

What would the consequences of this set of rules have been if they hadn’t been stopped?

1

Anonymous #2 17w

I’d encourage you to use the link to read the briefs from the petitioners, who lay that out. The court’s opinion is based on the process of the rule making and the lack of a statutory authority authorizing the FCC to institute the rule. Holding agencies accountable to the letter of the law, as our courts are doing for the current admin, benefits everyone by creating a fair and democratic administrative state.

1

Anonymous OP 17w

Hold up what makes you think the courts are holding the current admin accountable to the letter of the law?

1

Anonymous #2 17w

The lower courts have issued more injunctions against action from this admin than they have for any other at this point in the term.

1

Anonymous OP 17w

Well yeah because he’s been overstepping many legal boundaries in his attempt restructure the federal government and grant himself more power. You made it sound like his administration was complying with the courts

1

Anonymous #2 17w

No, I did not. I talked about the action of the courts, which are doing their job and enjoining excesses of statutory authority by executive agencies.

1