Joe Biden's out-of-control SEC
The SEC's proposed rule is likely unconstitutional because of the Supreme Court's Major Questions Doctrine, which says "In a 6–3 ruling issued on June 30, 2022, the Court ruled that the regulation of existing power plants in Section 7411(d) fell under the major questions doctrine, and within that, Congress did not grant the EPA authority to regulate emissions from existing plants based on generation shifting mechanisms, which would have invalidated the Clean Power Plan. The EPA may still continue to regulate emissions at existing plants through emissions reduction technologies."
Those changes, SCOTUS ruled, can only happen if Congress writes that authority into the authorizing bill. In the Court's 6-3 ruling, they ruled that the Clean Water Act didn't authorize this type of rule-making authority for the EPA.
This video brushes aside questions about whether the SEC is authorized to make rules regarding climate change:
The only consideration from the narrator is whether the rule will improve your carbon footprint. The SEC was created in 1934 "to help fight the devastating economic effects of the Great Depression and prevent any future market calamities." I'm betting the proverbial ranch that Congress didn't authorize the SEC to fight climate change, especially considering the fact that climate change wasn't viewed as an existential threat to humanity.Whether overreaching regulators or Wall Street wokesters, the new House majority will likely seek to ensure that neither group is abusing its lawful authority."There is mounting evidence the grassroots backlash on the right against 'woke' corporate America has tremendous momentum and is reshaping" Republican priorities, Piper Sandler’s Andy Laperriere is telling clients. "This could have potentially broad policy implications, and industries like big tech, Wall Street, and entertainment are in the crosshairs," he adds.
Comments
Post a Comment