It’s a little known fact that Justice Gorsuch’s mother was the EPA Administrator under Reagan, and she resigned after an abysmal record of mismanagement.

He’s clearly got some mommy issues.

Just to reaffirm. This ruling is insanely dumb and absolutely hamstrings pretty much all federal enforcement in any domain (it is for a case specific to the EPA but it hurts the DEA, SEC, and DHS just as bad).

An absolute endless embarrassment. It'd be funny if it weren't our fucking collective futures being sold off part and parcel

I don't usually use much profanity but this is a fucking travesty and the six conservative justices are traitors to the American people. They should all be impeached for blatant corruption and for being bought and paid-for by industry interests. They're not even going to be embarrassed about their scientific mistake except that they got caught out on not understanding what they're ruling on. They know they aren't the experts in everything. They just want corporations to have free reign and for them to be able to trample the rights of citizens.

This is going to allow the courts to rapidly unwind decades of progress that has been made on some of the most important subjects including environmental regulations, workplace regulations and employee rights, antitrust law, and anticorruption law to name a few. Between this and the Jarkesy decision we're going to go back to the days of burning eyes in Los Angeles and Lake Erie on fire, deadly workplaces and no employee right to organize, anticompetitive corporate practices with no oversight, and rampant corporate fraud. There is no longer a reasonable enforcement mechanism due to Jarkesy and there is now no real rule-making authority.

As I said before, all six conservative justices should be impeached for blatant corruption and working against the best interests of the American people. I'd settle for impeaching Alito and Thomas, but they should all be impeached. They are traitors to the American people.

• NO, NO~2~ (or collectively, NO~x~) - air pollutants

• N~2~O - anaesthetic

Just in case anyone was wondering about the specific minutiae this ruling requires non-subject-matter-expert judges to take on.

I could be totally wrong here since I don't have a great understanding of how these processes worked. So downvote if you will but I'd like to be corrected.

Does this even really matter when in a lot of cases the 'experts' were often paid to say whatever corporations wanted anyhow? See the current climate crisis and all the 'experts' that guided policy and enabled it.

Obviously letting the courts just go by whatever their guts tell them isn't the answer, but some sort of a best guess based on a large enough scientific consensus?