We might be one Justice away from defanging the administrative state Retweet
- Here’s your chance to potentially overturn the entire administrative state, in one Supreme Court case.
- This opportunity has a direct connection to one of our Downsize DC Agenda bills, WTLA (the Write the Laws Act).
WTLA would prohibit Congress from delegating its law-making power to unelected bureaucrats in the Executive Branch.
And this is the issue that at least four justices want to explore in the case United States vs. Gundy. Four justices are required for the High Court to take a case, often indicating we only need only one more justice in order to win.
Gundy involves a law passed by Congress in July 2006 — SORNA, the Sex Offender Registration Act. SORNA delegates vast rule-making power to the Attorney General. In other words…
Congress takes the power delegated only to them in the Constitution to legislate — to write and pass laws — and hands that power to unelected bureaucrats.
In this instance, the AG gets to decide when and how sex offenders convicted prior to SORNA must register when they change locations. The Justice Department decided to apply the law to a man convicted prior to the law’s passage. So here’s the question the court wants to review…
Is it constitutional for Congress to delegate their power to decide details like “when and how” to an unelected bureaucrat — the Attorney General in this case — or must such details be decided by Congress itself, in advance, so that everyone can know exactly what the law is?
Please understand, if the Court rules that Congress must decide these details then…
- The constitutional “separation of powers” could be restored in the blink of an eye, or be on its way to restoration
- The administrative-regulatory state created by the New Deal would be severely undermined
Indeed, that’s the real opportunity we see here. We will have partners on this amicus brief. Many of them deal with specific elements of the unelected bureaucratic state.
- One saw opportunities to restrain the FEC.
- Another saw freedom from oppressive acts by the FDA.
- Still another got excited about how they could apply a positive result to the BATF.
This case could be a WEDGE, a landmark precedent ruling that removes the ability of the “administrative state” to engage in “legislation without representation.”
Don’t forget, at least four justices decided to review this question. They would not have done so if they were satisfied with the New Deal, status quo. But how far they’re willing to deviate from that status quo may well depend on the arguments we make in our brief.
We must turn to you to make this WEDGE amicus brief a reality. Who else can we ask to make this brief to happen, if not you?
That means we must reach…
- At least one Patron at the $1,000 to $2,000 level,
- 40 people making generous contributions, and…
- Ten new monthly pledgers, who will also make future briefs possible.
Please choose which level is right for you, because we cannot seize this opportunity to end unlawful delegation of power to unelected bureaucrats without you.
DownsizeDC.org is partnering with the Downsize DC Foundation, home of the Zero Aggression Project. When you click this link, you’ll be taken to the ZAP contribution form. That way your contribution can be tax-deductible if you itemize.
Thank you, in advance, for your support,
Jim Babka & Perry Willis
Downsize DC Foundation
& DownsizeDC.org, Inc.
P.S. The attorneys assure me that Downsize DC’s Write the Laws Act will be referenced in this amicus brief. But the right result, in this case, might restore the separation of powers, or at least begin the process. The WTLA was always about restoring a constitutional principle — No legislation without representation. Our position has always been that it was unconstitutional (illegal) for Congress to delegate their power to unelected bureaucrats. With a victory in the Gundy case, we’d have tools to fight both in the Courts and the Congress. Please add your support.