Advertisement
Grab your lab coat. Let's get started
Welcome!
Welcome!
Create an account below to get 6 C&EN articles per month, receive newsletters and more - all free.
It seems this is your first time logging in online. Please enter the following information to continue.
As an ACS member you automatically get access to this site. All we need is few more details to create your reading experience.
Not you? Sign in with a different account.
Not you? Sign in with a different account.
ERROR 1
ERROR 1
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
Password and Confirm password must match.
If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)
ERROR 2
ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.
Litigation
Reactions: Praising Loper Bright decision
September 19, 2024
| A version of this story appeared in
Volume 102, Issue 29
Letters to the editor
More on Loper Bright decision
Contra the opinions expressed by recent observers (C&EN, July 8/15, 2024, page 3, and Aug. 12/18, 2024, page 3), I fully support the recent Supreme Court decision on Loper Bright Enterprises.
My reading and experience are that regulatory agency officials will essentially always act to expand the scope of their authority, their powers, and their budgets. To allow such officials to unilaterally determine that scope seems very unconstitutional. The Constitution is a system of enumerated powers. It is not a blank check to agencies that get to unilaterally decide the extent of their authority. Or to redefine words (e.g., pollutant) beyond the meaning intended by Congress.
Whatever happened to concepts like separation of powers and checks and balances? Perhaps with the Loper Bright decision we can start in some small way to get back to a state in which the Constitution actually matters.
If that causes a problem with some agencies, here’s the solution: stop overreaching your clear authority. If an interpretation of a statute is vague, how about deciding on the other side of your own vested power interests?
After all, Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address did not say, “Government of the administrative state, by the administrative state, and for the administrative state.” No, I’m pretty sure “the people” were mentioned in there somewhere.
Alex Schuettenberg
Bartlesville, Oklahoma
Chemical & Engineering News
ISSN 0009-2347
Copyright © 2025 American Chemical Society
You might also like...
Advertisement
The power is now in your (nitrile gloved) hands
Sign up for a free account to get more articles. Or choose the ACS option that’s right for you.
Already have an ACS ID? Log in
Join the conversation
Contact the reporter
Submit a Letter to the Editor for publication
Engage with us on X