The recent Supreme Court decision to overturn Chevron Deference marks a significant shift in how administrative agencies operate. Previously, this doctrine allowed agencies to interpret ambiguous laws, effectively creating regulations without explicit legislative approval. Now, with Chevron Deference gone, these agency interpretations are no longer automatically considered law. This ruling hands back substantial power to the public, enabling “WE THE PEOPLE” to challenge the bureaucratic overreach that has long been unchecked.

This development underscores the need for Congress to step up and fulfill its legislative responsibilities. It’s an opportunity for citizens to demand that Congress directly address issues like reducing spending and cutting through the thicket of regulatory red tape. It’s time for Congress to legislate, not delegate, thereby ensuring that regulations reflect the will of the people through elected representatives rather than unelected bureaucrats.

The 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution reserves to the states or the people all powers not delegated to the federal government or prohibited by the Constitution. If this amendment were to be strictly interpreted in the context of regulatory authority, it would mean stripping away much of the federal regulatory apparatus and returning the responsibility for regulation to individual states. This shift could lead to a more decentralized approach where states could tailor regulations to fit local needs, potentially fostering innovation and competition among states. However, it might also result in a patchwork of regulations across the country, complicating interstate commerce and possibly leading to disparities in areas like environmental protection, consumer safety, and labor laws. The change would require a significant reevaluation of how federal and state governments interact, potentially redefining the balance of power established over decades of federal regulatory growth.

Under the strict interpretation of the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states or the people, several federal departments could potentially be abolished, returning their functions to state governance. The Department of Education, for instance, could be dismantled, allowing states to take full control over educational policy, standards, and funding, which might lead to a diverse educational landscape reflecting local values and needs. Similarly, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) could be eliminated, with housing policies and urban development initiatives managed at the state level, potentially fostering more localized solutions to housing crises. Additionally, the Department of Health and Human Services could be restructured or abolished, transferring responsibilities for health policy, welfare programs, and human services to the states, where they might be better tailored to regional demographics and health challenges. Such a move would signify a profound shift towards federalism, emphasizing state sovereignty and potentially leading to varied outcomes across different states.