[sattoshi]

The problem aren’t interpretative courts, its unclear laws.

The pencil example is all fun and games, but swap « buying mechanical pencils » with « sending people to prison », and then it makes more sense why some people prefer the judiciary branch to constrain the power of HR when there’s ambiguity.

[throwway120385]

It's pretty much impossible to write a statute to account for every single possible situation and interpretation. In one county where I live we recently had a huge kerfluffle over the county code section about a ferry and ferry fares and what kinds of things the farebox can be spent on. At one point there were three different rewrites of the same statute, all purported to accomplish the same goal, and all markedly different depending on which motivated entity wrote the proposal. At any rate someone still would have needed to interpret the statute.

[sattoshi]

The reasonable course of action is to pick one of the three rewrites that codify a proposed interpretation of the currently ambiguous rules.

What would be unreasonable is to give those 3 options to a judge and ask them to do a coin toss on which one is right, and then let it sit that way.

I may be radical in this, but I wish the judiciary could force the legislative branch to decide on what the law they wrote means.

[refulgentis]

The CEO example is intended to demonstrate why "ah good, this'll make the legislature more active" may be too simple.

I'd also prefer a more practical example to argue with.

IMHO my shift on this is due to the practical examples seen over the years, legislature delegating to an agency they create, with judicial review, ends up being a good thing.

I'm honestly unaware of any unjust rule-making that ended up unfairly trampling someone, much less whip-lash back and forth.

[eitally]

Indeed. What's happened fairly recently is that the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society have realized this and concluded that they can define the future of the country by strengthening the judiciary rather than trying [the much harder task] of making congress functional. It's working great, and even though this started further back it only became blatantly obvious to outsiders what was happening with the Trump presidency.