Andr3w
Region: US
Sunday 30 June 2024 02:09:48 GMT
250146
47594
2376
2936
Music
Download
Comments
Lisa R :
My favorite was the representative that asked if women could swallow a pill camera to see if they were pregnant like with colon cancer. And had to be told rhe camera wouldn't end up in our uterus 🤨🤨
2024-06-30 05:14:51
2315
Kathy :
you are the 1st person to explain this Chevron Doctrine to the public focusing on the a- political expertise, qualifications required in these agencies to make these executive decisions! judges or not
2024-06-30 03:37:29
2183
norrskenflavor :
Can judges take gratuities for ruling in favor of the payee?
2024-06-30 02:34:44
1749
Derrick Fahreal :
And since the SC has just legalized kick backs that judge is given a “gratuity” as they call it after ruling in favor of the company
2024-06-30 05:29:03
788
Jennifer Ruzic :
Why would they change this law? Why did they do this?
2024-06-30 03:03:52
52
Bex 🍉 :
I'm legitimately confused. Cause looking at Flint and Nestle as well as several other issues like food recalls I'm wondering what these agencies actually do?
2024-06-30 02:48:38
4
Megan :
Why is it a life long position for the justices and can it be changed?
2024-06-30 02:25:24
435
Frankkie :
People didn’t read _The Jungle_ in school and it shows. They also don’t remember rivers being on fire before EPA regulations cut that out. Mostly.
2024-07-01 00:46:01
568
Kevin Parker :
the decision doesn't remove the say of agency experts but rather removes the deference given to the agency and moves it to the court where the issue will be argued by experts and decided by a judge
2024-06-30 13:36:41
1
SES :
Yeah I wish more people understood the structure of admin agencies. Only the very top officials are political appointees. The day in, day out work is done by career civil servants with expertise.
2024-06-30 14:14:09
273
Sassy AML Survivor :
This is an excellent explanation and example. Thank you.
2024-06-30 03:27:25
218
JustAnotherDude :
Could a judge/lawyer not just bring in experts during the court case?
2024-06-30 13:28:38
1
Seanathanisalive :
the flip of that as well- they could ban chloride from drinking water, but someone could sue bc someone dropped salt in the water, and we have to hope the judge on the case knows the difference
2024-06-30 04:37:11
80
Adam Holland :
In your example the solution is to whitelist the things explicitly allowed to be dumped, and say nothing but these can be in water. That way all permutations are accounted for
2024-06-30 04:42:10
1
MaxW 🍉 :
Will there be any mechanism to hold the Supreme Court to account when (not if) one of its “regulatory” rulings can be shown to have caused mass injury or death?
2024-06-30 09:59:55
63
Josh :
Please someone talk about what this means for the Department of Defense. It's not mentioned in the opinion.
2024-06-30 02:45:17
118
Elle G42 :
I keep thinking about thalidomide: imagine a judge being like "sure, seems fine" & approving it rather than the FDA. could something like that happen bc of this?
2024-06-30 02:57:40
23
Sean Lee :
I liked your random stories. I now love your expert breakdown on passing laws. Love ya your work bro.
2024-06-30 02:35:40
222
wawewawe :
Which branch is supposed to interpret the law?
2024-06-30 15:09:04
2
Terri.Rn :
serious question, could they say asbestos or any derivatives formed thereafter?
2024-06-30 10:37:16
1
E Wed :
It’s unbelievably scary ☹️
2024-06-30 04:00:22
119
user5023280526549 :
-did you not see the “experts” at the epa- explaining how they (didn’t) understand how much power, battery powered cars would pull from the grid. That they just understand it’s better..experts??
2024-07-01 03:01:08
1
Eyetalic :
Serious question - and I am agreeing with you here! Would making a law that prevents dumping mesothelioma-causing chemicals work? I do understand this is bad. But trying to see a way around this mess.
2024-06-30 03:00:29
2
To see more videos from user @andr3wsky, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
