Congress makes law.
Regulations are agency interpretations of the law that should keep you within the intent of the law.
Any regulatory requirement could be challenged in court and still can be.
What Changed
Courts may not defer to an agency’s interpretation of the law just because it (the law) might be ambiguous. Instead, from now on, the Supreme Court said that judges “must exercise their independent judgment” when ruling on cases involving agency rules, regulations, guidance, or other actions. This signifies a major shift, putting much more oversight and accountability in the hands of judges. Now, judges will be freer to impose their own readings of the law — giving them broad leeway to upend regulations on health care, the environment, financial regulations, technology and more.
Unelected judges will independently decide questions on how the law will be interpreted. So in other words, judges will now make the regulations. Judges can strike down rules based on their own policy preferences. Until now, a court had to let the agencies’ interpretations stand as long as they fell within the realm of reasonability, even if the judge didn’t think it was the best reading. Now the judges can do what they like. IMO, that's exactly like you asking me, if you should have brain surgery. I know best. No matter if I know nothing. My no-nothing ruling is just simply far better than your 100-doctor medical opinion.
The courts now have exclusive power over every open issue—no matter how expertise-driven or policy-laden—involving the meaning of regulatory law. The courts are now the country’s administrative czar. Please explain how that makes things better. You have only removed the experts from the decision process. See how well you do when I remove your brain entirely.
If you think it's bad now, wait and see what engineering marvels will result from judges independent decisions on design and operating issues, how long it will take to get any decision at all, what you will do in the meantime and if the judges design is worse or better than yours, if it works, or just simply blows up in your face. So, let's see what the courts have up their sleeves for the FAA certification process, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, FDIC, SEC, FDA.... and if all judges are of the same opinion. Of course not. Leading to chaos in the lower courts until SCOTUS imposes their solution. Again Unelected political appointees, again with no first hand experience in anything likely to be of relevance to any of these types of cases, being briefed by lawyers of similar qualifications.
The only thing I can think of that could be worse is Congress trying to write laws so specific that nothing is left to interpretation by either agencies or courts. Just increase the CFRs by a 1E9 factor, not written by any persons knowledgeabl in the fields, with the possible exception of lobbyist's biased contributions.
Boeing better get used to their planes only being allowed to fly within the US borders.
--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."
![[flame]](/data/assets/smilies/flame.gif "[flame] [flame]")
