US Supreme Court latest Climate change ruling could dampen efforts by federal agencies to rein in in The tech Industry, which has become largely unregulated for contracts like government try to catch up to me changes Made by the Internet.
in 6-3 decision Narrowly detailed for the EPA, the court ruled Thursday that the EPA does not have broad authority to do so reduce power Plant emissions that contribute to global Heating. This precedent is widely expected to invite challenges of else rules set by government agencies.
“Every agency will go face new Hurdles in waking up of This is a confusing decision,” said Alexandra Givens, President and CEO of Center for Democracy and Technology, based in Washington digital Non-profit rights. “But we hope the agencies will continue to do their jobs and pay off forward. “
Federal Trade Commission, in In particular, an aggressive agenda was pursued in Consumer protection, data privacy and tech industry competition under a certain leader last year by President Joe Biden.
Biden’s choices for The five-member Federal Communications Commission also They were striving for the strongest.”net Neutrality “protection that prevents Internet providers from slowing down down or blocking access To non-paying websites and apps for Outstanding service.
a former The FTC’s chief technologist said during President Donald Trump’s administration that the ruling is likely to instill some fear in Lawyers at the FTC and other federal agencies about how As far as they can go in industry new rules affect business.
The court “basically said when it comes to specialization policy changes can transform whole sectors of The economy, said Neil Chilson, who He is now a fellow of the libertarian-leaning organization Stand Together, founded by billionaire industrialist Charles Koch.
Givens disputed, arguing that many agencies, especially the FTC, have clear Power and should Be able to withstand EPA-inspired lawsuits decision. She noted that Chief Justice John Roberts, who He wrote the opinion, repeatedly calling it an “exceptional” situation.
Givens among tech advocates of advocacy for Congress to work with The urgency to enact laws that protect digital privacy and more tech issues. But she said the laws usually stay on books for decades, and it is unrealistic to expect Congress to weigh in on All new Technical development that question the agency’s mandate.
“we need democracy system Where can Congress give Expert Agencies power To address issues as they arise, even when those issues are unexpected. “The government literally no work with Congress legislates every turn.”
Authorized by Congress in The 1970s to tackle “injustice or deceitful” business practices, the Federal Trade Commission has been in vanguard of Biden government on a large scale to strengthen authorization competition in Some industries, including Big Tech, healthcare and agriculture. panorama of Targets include hearing aid prices, baggage charges, and “product of USA’ labels on food.
Under Chairman Lina Khan, Federal Trade Commission also widened the door to more actively writing new systems in what or what critics The saying is a broader interpretation of The legal authority of the agency. This initiative can run to strict law challenges in waking up of Supreme court decision. can judge call in questioning the agency regulatory agenda – leading either tread more cautiously or face tougher And the more expensive legal challenges.
Khan “wasn’t really a person who “It follows soft procedures, so it might be a style of damn torpedoes,” said Chilson.
University of Internet Massachusetts policy Expert Ethan Zuckerman said it would be hard To measure any potential impact of Court dicision on Existing tech Regulation. This is partly because “there is just Not much tech Organizing to retreat.
He said one The target may be the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau “a bête noire for Many conservatives.” Big companies like Facebook parent can dead also Strict enforcement action is likely to resume on The idea that federal agencies were not expressly authorized to regulate social media.
“they were in an area not shown on the map, with court take wrecking ball To a precedent and seems bent on hell on Implementation of many right-wing priorities possible in the shortest possible Zuckerman said.
Judgment can suppress appetite for agencies like The Federal Trade Commission is working to limit the harm from AI and more new technologies. can be less effect on new rules This is it more clearly in the scientist of agency imposed by it.
Michael Brooks, President counsel for non-profit center for Auto Safety, said the verdict is unlikely to change government’s ability to organize auto safety or self-driving vehiclesalthough it opens the door to the court challenges.
For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has clear Regulatory Authority auto safety from 1966 vehicle safety Brooks said.
“As long as rules It is issued related to safety of The vehicle and not anything outside of Their power, as long as it is attached to it safetyI do not see how The court can end run about safety act,” he said.
Unlike the Environmental Protection Agency, the agency with The authority granted under multiple and complex laws, the authority of the NHTSA is just even crystal clearBrooks said.
It could be NHTSA problems If it strays too far from regulation safety. For example, if you enact regulations aimed at diverting buyers away from SUVs to more Fuel-saving cars, which may take a beating down, He said. But the agency has historically stuck to mission of Organize auto safety with some power on fuel economyHe said.
However, it is possible That a company like Tesla, that tested the limits of NHTSA authorities, can sue and win Because of an unpredictable Supreme Court, Brooks said.
US Supreme Court latest Climate change ruling could dampen efforts by federal agencies to rein in in The tech Industry, which has become largely unregulated for contracts like government try to catch up to me changes Made by the Internet.
in 6-3 decision Narrowly detailed for the EPA, the court ruled Thursday that the EPA does not have broad authority to do so reduce power Plant emissions that contribute to global Heating. This precedent is widely expected to invite challenges of else rules set by government agencies.
“Every agency will go face new Hurdles in waking up of This is a confusing decision,” said Alexandra Givens, President and CEO of Center for Democracy and Technology, based in Washington digital Non-profit rights. “But we hope the agencies will continue to do their jobs and pay off forward. “
Federal Trade Commission, in In particular, an aggressive agenda was pursued in Consumer protection, data privacy and tech industry competition under a certain leader last year by President Joe Biden.
Biden’s choices for The five-member Federal Communications Commission also They were striving for the strongest.”net Neutrality “protection that prevents Internet providers from slowing down down or blocking access To non-paying websites and apps for Outstanding service.
a former The FTC’s chief technologist said during President Donald Trump’s administration that the ruling is likely to instill some fear in Lawyers at the FTC and other federal agencies about how As far as they can go in industry new rules affect business.
The court “basically said when it comes to specialization policy changes can transform whole sectors of The economy, said Neil Chilson, who He is now a fellow of the libertarian-leaning organization Stand Together, founded by billionaire industrialist Charles Koch.
Givens disputed, arguing that many agencies, especially the FTC, have clear Power and should Be able to withstand EPA-inspired lawsuits decision. She noted that Chief Justice John Roberts, who He wrote the opinion, repeatedly calling it an “exceptional” situation.
Givens among tech advocates of advocacy for Congress to work with The urgency to enact laws that protect digital privacy and more tech issues. But she said the laws usually stay on books for decades, and it is unrealistic to expect Congress to weigh in on All new Technical development that question the agency’s mandate.
“we need democracy system Where can Congress give Expert Agencies power To address issues as they arise, even when those issues are unexpected. “The government literally no work with Congress legislates every turn.”
Authorized by Congress in The 1970s to tackle “injustice or deceitful” business practices, the Federal Trade Commission has been in vanguard of Biden government on a large scale to strengthen authorization competition in Some industries, including Big Tech, healthcare and agriculture. panorama of Targets include hearing aid prices, baggage charges, and “product of USA’ labels on food.
Under Chairman Lina Khan, Federal Trade Commission also widened the door to more actively writing new systems in what or what critics The saying is a broader interpretation of The legal authority of the agency. This initiative can run to strict law challenges in waking up of Supreme court decision. can judge call in questioning the agency regulatory agenda – leading either tread more cautiously or face tougher And the more expensive legal challenges.
Khan “wasn’t really a person who “It follows soft procedures, so it might be a style of damn torpedoes,” said Chilson.
University of Internet Massachusetts policy Expert Ethan Zuckerman said it would be hard To measure any potential impact of Court dicision on Existing tech Regulation. This is partly because “there is just Not much tech Organizing to retreat.
He said one The target may be the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau “a bête noire for Many conservatives.” Big companies like Facebook parent can dead also Strict enforcement action is likely to resume on The idea that federal agencies were not expressly authorized to regulate social media.
“they were in an area not shown on the map, with court take wrecking ball To a precedent and seems bent on hell on Implementation of many right-wing priorities possible in the shortest possible Zuckerman said.
Judgment can suppress appetite for agencies like The Federal Trade Commission is working to limit the harm from AI and more new technologies. can be less effect on new rules This is it more clearly in the scientist of agency imposed by it.
Michael Brooks, President counsel for non-profit center for Auto Safety, said the verdict is unlikely to change government’s ability to organize auto safety or self-driving vehiclesalthough it opens the door to the court challenges.
For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has clear Regulatory Authority auto safety from 1966 vehicle safety Brooks said.
“As long as rules It is issued related to safety of The vehicle and not anything outside of Their power, as long as it is attached to it safetyI do not see how The court can end run about safety act,” he said.
Unlike the Environmental Protection Agency, the agency with The authority granted under multiple and complex laws, the authority of the NHTSA is just even crystal clearBrooks said.
It could be NHTSA problems If it strays too far from regulation safety. For example, if you enact regulations aimed at diverting buyers away from SUVs to more Fuel-saving cars, which may take a beating down, He said. But the agency has historically stuck to mission of Organize auto safety with some power on fuel economyHe said.
However, it is possible That a company like Tesla, that tested the limits of NHTSA authorities, can sue and win Because of an unpredictable Supreme Court, Brooks said.