Do you agree with the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Chevron doctrine?

👍 Yes (32%) – "The constitution simply does not permit executive branch people to wield legislative power. That is what has been going on for the past 40 years, under the Chevron doctrine. It is high time the constitution was respected again."

• "When legislation is vague, it should be resolved in either the legislative or judicial branch -- never the executive branch. The executive branch has been creating law for far too long. We need a balance and that's what striking down the Chevron doctrine just did."

"Feds can still make regulations but now the meaning of those regulations that wasn’t written clearly will not change with the whims of every new administration, as had been done in the past. So, the onus really is on congress to do their jobs and write clear bills and regulators to write clear regulations. If they don’t do that they run the risk of the courts making clear what they refused to make clear."

👎 No (53%) – "This court is removing any precedents established and delegitimizing government actions that were established to protect citizens. They are step by step breaking down government authority to protect human safety and security, as well as individual rights to make decisions."

• "Appointed judges should not have the power to overrule these types of regulations. They cannot be driven out of office except through impeachment if it is found they have been corrupt or unduly influenced in their decisions."

"This opens the door for all types of extreme conservative leaning policies to be brought forward. From birth control, to marriage, to medical and educational standings that were left to the professionals. Now, any judge that thinks “ they know better,” can subject people to ANY ruling they see fit."

• "It feels like so many decisions made by Supreme Court these days are political and party based. If judges are going to start acting like politicians rather than neutral and non-partisan actors of our democratic system, we should impose term limits on them instead of lifetime appointments."

"Agencies have the technical expertise that judges and lawyers just don't have. For climate-related issues, this will have a catastrophic effect on clean air, water pollution, transportation and more. Regulations keep companies in check. The Supreme Court has now given them free rein to tie up our legal system with challenges to regulations that have been designed to protect our environment and our health."

🤷 Unsure/other (15%) – "Chevron was well-intended and protections are needed to regulate corporations; however, there is merit in not having executive branch interpret laws. Unfortunately, now, regulations are opened up to all challenge, good and bad."