Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Monday, December 04, 2023

Mark Joseph Stern: Do you think that securities fraud, consumer scams, environmental crimes, labor violations, and a ton of other misdeeds should be efficiently and consistently penalized? Then you are out of luck, because the Supreme Court is poised to strip much of that enforcement power from the federal government.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Trump Justices: "The law is to protect our donors and ultra-rich friends, not you poor working slobs."

#1 | Posted by Sycophant at 2023-12-04 01:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Stop posting Facebook links you ------- spastic.

#2 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-12-04 01:59 PM | Reply

The SCOTUS is a laughing stock compared to what it once was.
The unqualified new Conservative members, and the two justices
that like to hob knob (and vacation) with billionaires (Thomas & Alito) have seen
to that.

#5 | Posted by earthmuse at 2023-12-04 03:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#4 | Posted by pastmyprime

So go ahead and show us what laws the Executive branch has made. I would say they make most of the regulations and enforcement around laws but that is actually a system that works and has worked for as the article points out well over a century. It doen't fall to the states to enforce Federal law.

#6 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2023-12-04 03:19 PM | Reply

This is a 7th amendment issue.

#7 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-04 03:33 PM | Reply

Remember when OBAMA was going to "change America as we know it"?

Jeffybell should, he wrote it here many times

Looks like it was just another confession

#8 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2023-12-04 03:52 PM | Reply

A lot of you clowns need to take a basic government course and stop getting your information from Xitter.

#9 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2023-12-04 04:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#9 I read about this case at Scotusblog, moron.

#10 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-04 04:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

All of these federal agencies are included in the executive branch; in theory they are not authorized to create laws.

#11 | POSTED BY HUMANIMAL

Congress passes a law to create an agency, it grants that agency general authority to regulate certain activities within our society. Congress may also pass a law that more specifically directs an agency to solve a particular problem or accomplish a certain goal.

Oversight of an agency that Congress created is the job of Congress. Not the Supreme Court.

But I guess now Republicans are all ok with that whole legislating from the bench thing now that they basically control the majority of the supremes.

#12 | Posted by donnerboy at 2023-12-04 07:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This is a 7th amendment issue.

#7 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Ok. I'll byte.

What does the right to a trial by jury have to do with federal agencies that are created by Congress?

#13 | Posted by donnerboy at 2023-12-04 08:00 PM | Reply

"What does the right to a trial by jury have to do with federal agencies that are created by Congress?

#13 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY AT 2023-12-04 08:00 PM"

It has to do with those agencies issuing fines or injunctions without any due process.

That's my understanding based on what I read at Scotusblog.

Now, it's been going on for decades so the legal argument can also be made that fines/injunctions from an agency like the SEC don't fall under due process.

#14 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-04 09:01 PM | Reply

Yeppper what our court system needs is thousands of new, HIGHLY complex, cases heard by politically appointed judges who don't know the HIGHLY complex technical issues at hand.

There is due justice, just not in the normal civil courts.

#15 | Posted by truthhurts at 2023-12-04 09:08 PM | Reply

"Supreme Court is task to check this unconstitutional arrangement."

Is the unconstitutional arrangement in the room with us right now?

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-12-04 09:41 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

16

So... this has effected street pimping?

That's awful for you.

#18 | Posted by Corky at 2023-12-04 09:41 PM | Reply

The president directs all the federal agencies. Legislators are out of the loop; they have their bribes/contributions and to them it's a done deal.

Not exactly, Legislators can squeeze their budgets.

generate increasing number of 'executive orders' to DICTATORIALLY control the country independent of congressional input.

Yeah this is completely the opposite of whats happening, unless you're saying FDR was a dictator.
2.-------------

#21 | Posted by oneironaut at 2023-12-04 09:55 PM | Reply

FDR was a hero and his haters a bunch of Nazi c****

#25 | Posted by Tor at 2023-12-04 10:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"FDR was a hero and his haters a bunch of Nazi c****
#25 | POSTED BY TOR"

FDR directly enabled the communists to conquer half the world's population and kill hundreds of millions. Also, I am convinced he knowingly let Pearl Harbor happen as he wanted to enter the war. He is no hero.

#26 | Posted by Claudio at 2023-12-04 10:21 PM | Reply

"The agencies may be created by legislators, but after they exist they answer to the executive."

You can sure tell when Russian propagandists don't understand American law.

When Congress creates a federal agencies it is a law. The law.

Congress is supposed to have oversight of all federal agencies and if they are not performing and operating according to what Congress wants then Congress can change the law that it created. They also have appropriations control if those agencies do not cooperate with the oversight responsibility of Congress.

When Congress functions as it should that is. But since Republicans are busy proving that government does not work they are allowing the Supreme Court to do what they should be doing. And apparently you approve of that. Probably because you don't understand American government 101.

#27 | Posted by donnerboy at 2023-12-04 10:22 PM | Reply

FDR is the reason you aren't speaking German nadia.

#28 | Posted by Tor at 2023-12-05 12:13 AM | Reply

"I just this year shut down a business because of out-of-control regulatory overreach driven by lobbyists and corrupt agency stroking each other with fees and bribes."

If you were a good businessman you would have kept abreast of the current laws, regulations, and taxes and budgeted for them rather than blaming others for your personal failings. Somehow small businesses seem to generally keep operating. Maybe someone else will take up the business opportunity created by your poor planning.

#29 | Posted by dibblda at 2023-12-05 03:07 AM | Reply

"station wagon or a regular light bulb"

Station wagon and incandescent light bulb? Lol, 1980 is calling and it wants its technology back.

Also, do you like burning money to poorly light a room and heat it slightly? Do you also use a rotary phone? No wonder you went out of business.

#30 | Posted by dibblda at 2023-12-05 03:13 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Somehow small businesses seem to generally keep operating. Maybe someone else will take up the business opportunity created by your poor planning.
#29 | POSTED BY DIBBLDA"

Tell that to Market Street in SF or J Street in Sacramento. Times have changed and online sales + the hassles imposed by the government will forever change jobs in the US.

#31 | Posted by Claudio at 2023-12-05 05:07 AM | Reply

Somehow small businesses seem to generally keep operating. Maybe someone else will take up the business opportunity created by your poor planning.
#29 | POSTED BY DIBBLDA"

Tell that to Market Street in SF or J Street in Sacramento. Times have changed and online sales + the hassles imposed by the government will forever change jobs in the US.

#31 | POSTED BY CLAUDIO A
Borough to you by the never righters

www.commerceinstitute.com

Ayup

#32 | Posted by truthhurts at 2023-12-05 09:39 AM | Reply

I just this year shut down a business because of out-of-control regulatory overreach driven by lobbyists and corrupt agency stroking each other with fees and bribes.

What business was that?

#33 | Posted by JOE at 2023-12-05 10:17 AM | Reply

Just an example.

If ballsucker gets his way... EVERY....SINGLE...IMMIGRATION...CASE.... will get a jury trial.

#34 | Posted by truthhurts at 2023-12-05 10:23 AM | Reply

It has to do with those agencies issuing fines or injunctions without any due process.

You think there isnt ANY due process in an SEC administrative enforcement proceeding? Maybe you need to read more. That would be a very big surprise to all of the lawyers who advocate on behalf of respondents in those cases, as well as the ALJs who decide them.

#35 | Posted by JOE at 2023-12-05 10:25 AM | Reply

and of course the adjudication can be appealed to full SEC board and then to federal court.

#36 | Posted by truthhurts at 2023-12-05 10:40 AM | Reply

Claudia has never been to Sacramento LOL

#37 | Posted by Tor at 2023-12-05 10:45 AM | Reply

"I just this year shut down a business because of out-of-control regulatory overreach driven by lobbyists and corrupt agency stroking each other with fees and bribes."

Welcome to capitalism. Apparently you suck at it.

Maybe you should try socialism so you could protected from your own failures.

#38 | Posted by donnerboy at 2023-12-05 11:00 AM | Reply

This is a 7th amendment issue.
#7 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER
It has to do with those agencies issuing fines or injunctions without any due process.
That's my understanding based on what I read at Scotusblog.
Now, it's been going on for decades so the legal argument can also be made that fines/injunctions from an agency like the SEC don't fall under due process.
#14 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

It's not a 7th Amendment issue. This isn't a Common Law case or cause of action. Please READ the 7th Amendment.

These agencies provide due process and the right to appeal. Read the SCOTUSBlog's entire article.
www.scotusblog.com

This isn't rocket science but it is technical. So not understanding it isn't your fault. The SEC, through Congress, has the right to create regulations. These are not common law actions. So the 7th Amendment doesn't apply. The Defendants have due process rights and those exist in administrative hearings. The only right they don't have is to a Jury...which is really what this case is about.

#39 | Posted by Sycophant at 2023-12-05 11:20 AM | Reply

It's better to be a beggar on the streets of Sacramento then a rich man in russia.

#40 | Posted by Tor at 2023-12-05 06:50 PM | Reply

"Claudia has never been to Sacramento LOL
#37 | POSTED BY TOR"

Does whether I did or did not live there change the FACT that J Street (a major commercial street in the city) has all but died? Does it change that fact for San Francisco?

You slow -------- constantly change every discussion to be about the poster and refuse to ever discuss the actual aspects of the articles or arguments because people like me come armed with an AR-15 of knowledge and you have nothing but handfuls of ----.

#43 | Posted by Claudio at 2023-12-05 10:47 PM | Reply

armed with an AR-15 of knowledge

Is that anything like the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch?

#44 | Posted by REDIAL at 2023-12-05 10:55 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Is that anything like the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch?
#44 | POSTED BY REDIAL"

You are the perfect example of the slow ------- that I mentioned above. So, let's get back to the question:

"Does whether I did or did not live there change the FACT that J Street (a major commercial street in the city) has all but died? Does it change that fact for San Francisco?"

You have something actually constructive to add to the discussion?

#45 | Posted by Claudio at 2023-12-05 10:59 PM | Reply

#45. Come on. Who doesn't like a good Holy Grail reference?

#46 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-05 11:12 PM | Reply

"#45. Come on. Who doesn't like a good Holy Grail reference?
#46 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER"

Normally, I would not care - it is just an annoying pattern here.

For instance, yesterday Danforth got all bent out of shape over if the number of migrants raped crossing was 80% or 60% - spoiler alert, the number if 80% from Fusion and 60% from Amnesty International AND they are 2 different studies. Now, whether the number is 80% or 60% is not really material to the discussion of 'do we have criminal crossing the borders' - to which I made the original comment that someone is raping 80% of the girls. Thus, I didn't engage in 'chase a link' for something that is immaterial to the actual discussion. Yet, you will see the slow -------- try to get their little victories - such as in that case, even when they are wrong, meanwhile - productive discussion does not occur.

#47 | Posted by Claudio at 2023-12-06 12:33 AM | Reply

" meanwhile - productive discussion does not occur.

#47 | POSTED BY CLAUDIO AT 2023-12-06 12:33 AM | FLAG: "

It's a rarity on this site for the very reasons you cited. It's become almost exclusively a team sport. It's about winning, not discussing. It's why so many get incredibly pedantic and attack the messenger is the norm.

#48 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-06 12:41 AM | Reply

"spoiler alert, the number if 80% from Fusion and 60% from Amnesty International "

No it's not.

Fusion was merely reporting the Amnesty results, not doing a study on their own. I already corrected you on that fact.

Looks like you shot yourself again with that AR-15.

#49 | Posted by Danforth at 2023-12-06 12:55 AM | Reply

"It's a rarity on this site for the very reasons you cited."

Really.

I think it's a rarity because so many people purposely try to get away with so many lies.

And then pretend they were just shooting from the hip.

#50 | Posted by Danforth at 2023-12-06 12:57 AM | Reply

How do we "fact check" an opinion?

#51 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-06 01:02 AM | Reply

As to the topic of rape and sex trafficking that are baked into the cake of illegal immigratiion, even if the actual number is 30% (half of the number in the study that Claudio cited) that is absolutely horrific.

#52 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-06 01:05 AM | Reply

"How do we "fact check" an opinion?"

You ask for the Long Form Birth Certificate.

#53 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-12-06 01:09 AM | Reply

"even if the actual number is 30% (half of the number in the study that Claudio cited) that is absolutely horrific."

Oh you poor thing.
One in five women in the United States experienced completed or attempted rape during their lifetime.
You've never once pretended to care about American women.
That's why nobody believes you when you pretend to care about the plight of migrants.
You stupid piece of ----.

#54 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-12-06 01:12 AM | Reply

Snoofy,

You get ignored by so many for a reason. Think about that.

#55 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-06 01:49 AM | Reply

"You get ignored by so many for a reason."

What's yours?

#56 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-12-06 02:09 AM | Reply

"Fusion was merely reporting the Amnesty results, not doing a study on their own. I already corrected you on that fact.
#49 | POSTED BY DANFORTH"

Here is the actual quote from the original article:

splinternews.com

"A staggering 80 percent of Central American girls and women crossing Mexico en route to the United States are raped along the way, according to directors of migrant shelters interviewed by Fusion."

This article is still up and not retracted. It quotes the source of the claims as "directors of migrant shelters interviewed by Fusion" - no where does it mention it is a mistaken statement based on them reporting on the Amnesty results.

If you have an article from Fusion that states what you claim above please post it and I will retract my post above.

However, as stated, the argument is about 60% - 80% of illegals getting raped along their journey - someone is doing the raping so claiming Trump is a racist by stating that the Mexicans are sending rapists is just factually wrong.

#57 | Posted by Claudio at 2023-12-06 03:30 AM | Reply

claiming Trump is a racist by stating that the Mexicans are sending rapists is just factually wrong.

LOL. That's what that two day rant was about?

#58 | Posted by REDIAL at 2023-12-06 08:34 AM | Reply

Love how Jeff is still here even though he got called out for claiming there isnt any due process in an SEC enforcement proceeding. Dude just vomits out nonsense 24/7 and pretends not to see any rebuttals.

#59 | Posted by JOE at 2023-12-06 10:17 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Joe,

You are ------- stupid. You must have manure for your brains.

#60 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-06 10:19 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Great retort ------. Very substantive and on topic as usua.

#61 | Posted by JOE at 2023-12-06 10:20 AM | Reply

#61. It was every bit as substantive as the post I was responding to, jagoff.

#62 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-06 10:23 AM | Reply

"Dude just vomits out nonsense 24/7 and pretends not to see any rebuttals."

They are Idiot-Savants, and what you describe is their Savant ability.

#63 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-12-06 10:23 AM | Reply

It was every bit as substantive as the post I was responding to

Notably, you never responded to the actual substantive rebuttal of your position in #35, just to the call-out later because you're too much of a ----------- coward to admit you have no clue what you're talking about.

#64 | Posted by JOE at 2023-12-06 10:26 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

What's worse is you failed to detect the fact that my response was a movie quote and I was trying to be humorous.

It is from National Lampoon Vacation.

#65 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-06 10:26 AM | Reply

" 64 | POSTED BY JOE AT 2023-12-06 10:26 AM | FLAG: "

That's because your #35 was loaded with suppositions All I did was try to articulate my understanding of both sides of this issue. That's it.

#66 | Posted by BellRinger at 2023-12-06 10:30 AM | Reply

s All I did was try to articulate my understanding

Your "understanding" is wrong. It's ok for people to tell you that.

#67 | Posted by JOE at 2023-12-06 10:46 AM | Reply

FDR directly enabled the communists to conquer half the world's population and kill hundreds of millions.

That's odd considering he was dead.

#68 | Posted by jpw at 2023-12-06 11:41 AM | Reply

This is a 7th amendment issue.

#7 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

No, it isn't.

#69 | Posted by jpw at 2023-12-06 12:02 PM | Reply

All of these federal agencies are included in the executive branch; in theory they are not authorized to create laws.

#11 | POSTED BY HUMANIMAL

Do you idiots even read anything before spouting off?

These regulatory agencies don't create laws. They're created by Congressional action to, wait for it, enforce regulatory statutes also passed by Congress.

Also, the court is, yet again, overturning long held precedence supported by multiple cases allowing for Congressional delegation of administrative powers. Because, you know, they claim some historical nonsense narrative overrides precedence.

constitution.findlaw.com

#70 | Posted by jpw at 2023-12-06 12:12 PM | Reply

Now, it's been going on for decades so the legal argument can also be made that fines/injunctions from an agency like the SEC don't fall under due process.

#14 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Except you go before a judge and defend your case just like a trial. How is that not due process?

It has nothing to do with not falling under due process and everything to do with the GOP wanting free reign to be corrupt, untouchable POSes.

#71 | Posted by jpw at 2023-12-06 12:15 PM | Reply

Supreme Court is task to check this unconstitutional arrangement.

Multiple cases have ruled on the Constitutionality of delegation of authority.

You're wrong and use words you don't understand.

#72 | Posted by jpw at 2023-12-06 12:16 PM | Reply

I believe the salient point to all this is that congress cannot delegate their authority to make laws.
#42 | POSTED BY HUMANIMAL

The salient point is that you're an ignorant moron spewing nonsense you're too lazy to read about first.

As already mentioned, no wonder you went out of business.

#73 | Posted by jpw at 2023-12-06 12:20 PM | Reply

You slow -------- constantly change every discussion to be about the poster and refuse to ever discuss the actual aspects of the articles or arguments because people like me come armed with an AR-15 of knowledge and you have nothing but handfuls of ----.

#43 | POSTED BY CLAUDIO

LOL your "AR-15 of knowledge" is about as limp as your d&^%.

The reason people often don't address the "substance" of your argument and instead appear to make it about you by telling you you're wrong is because...you're wrong. Pretty much always.

But, being a typical MAGA moron, you think your half cocked BS opinions are deserving of respect on the same level as actual knowledge.

#74 | Posted by jpw at 2023-12-06 12:22 PM | Reply

Let me guess, you're on 'benefits'.
#41 | POSTED BY HUMANIMAL

Guess again.

#75 | Posted by donnerboy at 2023-12-06 12:24 PM | Reply

It's a rarity on this site for the very reasons you cited. It's become almost exclusively a team sport. It's about winning, not discussing. It's why so many get incredibly pedantic and attack the messenger is the norm.

#48 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Actually, it's because conversing with righties is like shoveling against a manure tide. Endless waves of ignorance and bulls&^% have to we waded through to occasionally find something worth actually discussing.

#76 | Posted by jpw at 2023-12-06 12:24 PM | Reply

All but Gorsuch and Alito seemed skeptical during oral arguments.

I don't think the Moore's are going to prevail.

#78 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2023-12-06 12:34 PM | Reply

In limiting Congress's power to delegate, the nondelegation doctrine exists primarily to prevent Congress from ceding its legislative power to other entities not vested with legislative authority under the Constitution.

It's a good thing the agencies aren't legislating, isn't it?

constitution.congress.gov

In its 2022 decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, the Supreme Court provided further clarity on the nondelegation doctrine, emphasizing that a decision of magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body.3

As of 2022, this very court ruled that delegation of power was perfectly Constitutional.

#79 | Posted by jpw at 2023-12-06 12:37 PM | Reply

Please note the lack of stupid insults in my posts. I'm raising the room for you. I'm sure it won't have much effect, but you're welcome.
#81 | POSTED BY HUMANIMAL

Hardly. Funny, though, considering you then say

OK Orwellian apologist.

#84 | POSTED BY HUMANIMAL

LOL what an idiot. Doesn't understand the topic and spews talking point nonsense around books he probably hasn't read to cover for it.

You know what raises the room and doesn't result in snipes? Actually portraying the topic properly.

Delegation of administrative power is a long standing legal function Congress undertakes so long as that delegated power doesn't include legislative power.

Which is why you keep whining that agencies operating under Congressionally delegated powers are supposedly legislating when they're not.

The entire reason this case is getting the attention it is is because if SCOTUS rules in favor of the plaintiff, they'll be ignoring and overturning long, unchallenged precedence based on some new "historical" interpretation.

#85 | Posted by jpw at 2023-12-06 01:13 PM | Reply

"FDR directly enabled the communists to conquer half the world's population and kill hundreds of millions."

That was the deal that was made in order to defeat the Third Reich.
Do you not think that was a good deal?
I mean, it was a good deal for the United States and the West.

#86 | Posted by snoofy at 2023-12-06 02:19 PM | Reply

Germany was actively conquering any European country that wasn't an ally. America was right to assist anyone in Europe that was actively fighting fascist imperialism.

#87 | Posted by Tor at 2023-12-06 02:26 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2024 World Readable

Drudge Retort