[persnicker]

"The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday made it nearly impossible for Americans to sue federal law enforcement officers who violate their constitutional rights, further narrowing the already limited path to hold U.S. officials accountable for even egregious misuse of their authority."

Source: https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-supreme-court-in...

This cannot be challenged because Chevron was in place. I would imagine it will now be challenged.

[tsimionescu]

Nothing at all in that decision has anything to do with Chevron. It's in fact almost the exact opposite of that: the Supreme Court has ruled that Congress has the final say on CBP's behavior, judges must defer to Congress.

Even if the law is a bit hard to understand, it's beyond obvious that the current Supreme Court, the same court that ruled on both of these decisions, intends for federal law enforcement officers to be immune from the law, while agencies are not able to make any decision beyond what Congress says. So the CBP, or at least its officers, will be even more powerful, while the EPA and FDA and FAA and FCC will be almost unable to do anything.

[roflyear]

> This cannot be challenged because Chevron was in place

Respectfully, language like this makes you look very partisan. Of course it could be challenged. How do you think Chevron got thrown out? Because something concerning it was challenged.

Still, it doesn't support your claim that Chevron means that an agency can interpret the constitution. That's not at all what Chevron says and it isn't true.

[ameister14]

>This cannot be challenged because Chevron was in place.

That's just not correct.