IM DA JOKER BABY

  • supdog [e/em/eir,ey/em]
    ·
    2 years ago

    read this from reason. com, which breaks it down fine. Obviously they think bad things are good but for describing the technical what-happened, it does that fine.

    It dealt more with the correct statutory reading of the clean air act than with the constitutional nondelegation, which is what we were scared about, which is still going to come up at some point.

    and tbh I think the decision is bad for consequentialist reasons, not because the reasoning is bad. Although when I read the dissent, I find myself agreeing with that too. I agree with whatever I read last :/