the last few seasons of Discovery have been a bit bogged down by the stuff that has always made it a tough sell as a Trek series: overly ambitious, serialized storylines that aren’t compelling; new characters and environments that don’t impress; plot twists which can be maddening in their lack of logic; big storytelling swings which can be confusing and predictable at once.
Yeah, it's not "underappreciated". It's just not very good for what many of us are expecting. I still haven't gotten through season 3.
I just watched a scene where Michael and Mol were working together, then suddenly Michael decides to attack Mol, then they have a kung fu fight and finally Michael asks Mol stop and says she needs to trust her, as if Michael hadn't just violently assaulted her. The writing is nonsensical.
Unfortunately that is symptomatic of the show as a whole and just one of many problems.
Also the constant deus ex machina, with the characters having a conversations where everyone finishes each others sentences. Its tiresome to watch. I really wanted to like the show but never could.
Our supreme court is packed with corporate lackeys. As much as I love this, it'll be overturned. It is a move in the right direction - you should not be allowed to take away someone's right to move jobs.
It's been issued by the FTC. I'm not sure if the courts are the mechanism to challenge this. Maybe in implementation. But not so much in overturning the policy.
A challenge to the FTC rule would ultimately lead to a potential Supreme Court case. The court is currently deciding on a case that could render render this decision moot before it ever gets that far.
Yes. It's an appeal. However it's still on the company to provide just cause for it to be removed. The way I am reading the mechanism it still favors the workers unless the company can provide just cause. It seems a NDA is more fitting in almost all cases.
It looks like they are suing them. Let's hope they take as long as they take with Trump. I am also not sure if suing them makes them financially liable or removes the stature? The article doesn't say much other than lobbyists (fuckin waste of space) are suing the FTC.
And SCOTUS is going to kill chevron deference later this year, which will largely destroy the administrative state and ability for federal agencies to promulgate and enforce regulations
Summary
Chevron and Skidmore deference are foundational concepts in administrative law, guiding how courts interact with administrative agency decisions.
Chevron Deference is based on the 1984 Supreme Court case Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. This doctrine holds that courts must defer to an agency's interpretation of an ambiguous statute it administers if the interpretation is reasonable. This two-step process asks first whether the statute is ambiguous and, if so, whether the agency's interpretation is reasonable.
Skidmore Deference derived from the 1944 Supreme Court case Skidmore v. Swift & Co., offers a more flexible approach. It suggests that the weight given to an agency's judgment depends on factors such as the thoroughness of the agency's investigation, the validity of its reasoning, its consistency with earlier and later pronouncements, and other persuasive factors.
Comparing Deference Types
The key difference between the two is the degree of deference accorded. Chevron provides a more robust deference when statutory language is ambiguous and the agency's interpretation is reasonable. Skidmore deference, on the other hand, is less prescriptive and more suggestive, relying heavily on the persuasiveness of the agency's rationale.
Practical Effects of Abolishing Chevron Deference
If the Supreme Court were to abolish Chevron deference, the immediate effect would be a shift in how courts review agency interpretations of law:
Increased Judicial Scrutiny: Courts would likely increase scrutiny of agency decisions, possibly leading to less predictable and more variable interpretations of laws across different jurisdictions.
Impact on Agencies: Agencies might experience a decrease in their ability to effectively implement and enforce regulations, as their expertise and interpretations would carry less weight in legal disputes.
Legislative Clarity: Congress might face pressure to draft more precise legislation to avoid ambiguities that agencies currently resolve.
Legal Uncertainty: Initially, the abolition of Chevron could lead to increased litigation as parties challenge agency interpretations that would have previously been upheld under Chevron deference.
They've tried several times with mixed results. Countries that allow cheap labor are generally difficult to deal with and quality is a real problem. Countries with better quality tend to have better labor protection that results in more problems for the company than US employees.
Hold up, if they didnt count citizenship on the last census then it would obviously impact federal elections because it would increase the number of congress and electoral votes in the state with more illegals in it.
The point is to rile up their chuds enough to go out and harass citizens who look like they may not be citizens (racial minorities) in order to scare them away from legally voting.
I pointed this out to a conservative coworker years ago . He asked me if illegal immigrants voted since I am an immigrant. I told him “if American’s don’t vote what makes you think immigrants would”, he just replied with “right, that makes sense”.
This is older than than NPR admits. The threat of foreign others “ruining the country” by voting goes back to 1865 and emancipated black men getting the franchise.
The false notion that undocumented immigrants are affecting federal elections has been floating around for over 100 years.
The fact that we haven’t dispelled a myth for a hundred years does not give me a lot of hope of convincing people they may be wrong.
Moreover, how it is at all possible for figure heads like Trump and Musk continue to get away with these lies and convince people the lies are facts, is just… I just don’t even know. I can’t wrap my head around it. It’s got a very “flat earth” vibe to it.
Great article. Lots of good points I’m sure no one who actually has a concern over this will bother to read.
Tump and Musk know exactly what they’re doing. The capitalist class uses racism and immigrant fearmongering to sow working class division and keep its focus away from its real enemy: the capitalist class.
Edit to add: Capitalists, often illegally, exploit immigrants for cheap labor, so you know their rhetoric is bullshit. How Capitalism Perpetuates Immigration
The fact that we haven’t dispelled a myth for a hundred years does not give me a lot of hope of convincing people they may be wrong
The people pushing it are probably aware it’s not true and definitely don’t care either way. They want cult members to threaten and intimidate anyone brown because the numbers say they’re more likely to vote Democrat.
npr.org
Hot