Latest Breaking News

muriel_volestrangler

(106,360 posts)

6. No, Alternet (and thus MSN) has copied incorrectly from the NYT, which said "can .. only if"

Sun Apr 19, 2026, 11:20 AM

7 hrs ago

The original NYT article has "can .. only if":

Though he doesn’t say so in so many words, Chief Justice Roberts’s citation of a 2014 precedent makes clear that he is invoking the “major questions doctrine” to block the plan.

That precedent said that agencies can make decisions of vast “economic and political significance” only if Congress explicitly grants them that power. In the years since, that doctrine has played an increasingly important role in the court’s work.

https://archive.ph/LgtuP

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

EX500rider

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Trove of documents shed rare light on Supreme Court's secretive affair with poison [View all] BumRushDaShow Yesterday OP

How is this sentence supposed to make sense ?? eppur_se_muova Yesterday #1

No, it means what it says - basically setting a limit to what the Executive Branch agencies are allowed to do BumRushDaShow 22 hrs ago #3

The unconstitutional war with Iran should fit under that and the Court should be stepping in. cstanleytech 20 hrs ago #4

But in that case BumRushDaShow 13 hrs ago #5

No, Alternet (and thus MSN) has copied incorrectly from the NYT, which said "can .. only if" muriel_volestrangler 7 hrs ago #6

shit like this chappes my hide oldinmtdem92 23 hrs ago #2