Supreme Court’s EPA Decision: Unconstitutional Violation of Separation of Powers

In the long term this decision is better for regulation. Anything that a president gets the EPA to do can be undone by a president that disagrees with them. By it&#x27;s nature the presidency is unitary - so any president will find it difficult to compromise with itself.<p>Congress on the other hand - even the House though less so then the Senate - requires compromise, requires some degree of buy in from all parties involved. This means less sweeping action - but anything that does get done will have advantages to a larger majority. Those supporting it will have an interest in it continuing because they will have been given something for their vote.

I find it curious that the same pattern as the abortion decision repeats. The initial decision post on HN gets high in the top, is wildly discussed, with lots of armchair lawyers chiming in (making it obviously something that &quot;piques one&#x27;s interest&quot;). However any of the follow-up posts, with interpretations from media&#x2F;experts&#x2F;whatever gets flagged to death.<p>Why? Apparently the topic was interesting enough for HN.