765

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has set his sights on eliminating the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday announced which cases it would consider next and which it wouldn't. Among those the court rejected was a case that challenged the authority of OSHA, which sets and enforces standards for health and safety in the workplace.

And Thomas, widely considered to be the most conservative justice on the already mostly conservative court, wasn't happy.

In a dissent, he explained why he believed the high court should've taken the case: OSHA's power, he argues, is unconstitutional.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 50 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Working in the chemical industry, this statement is horrifying.

Take a look for yourself:

https://m.youtube.com/user/USCSB

A fucking judge who sits on his ass all day, "interpreting" the constitution like he's some fucking oracle, wouldn't even begin to understand.

[-] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 16 points 2 years ago

I did Asbestos removal for awhile years ago. I cannot imagine not having OSHA. The amount of crap companies get away with with OSHA around is already absurd.

[-] t_chalco@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

I had no idea of this entity, but I work with enough similarly, highly nuanced public professionals that I recognize that the rapid and blind "immediately destroy all gubberment" approach will have widespread oh-holy-fuck consequenes if not just for the extensive brain vacuum potentially left in the wake of this type of growing mentality. Thanks for sharing your knowledge and perspective.

[-] Silentiea@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago

I mean, do we not remember when companies were literally locking employees into buildings as they come down in a raging inferno?

More than once?

[-] Natanael@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

If they believe congress shouldn't have the authority to delegate authority so broad then the way fix isn't to eliminate the delegation but to require that congress reviews the regulatory agencies to see if they're acting as according to their intent (yes there's risk of abuse for this too, like endless micromanaging, etc, this is just to defuse the constitutionality argument)

Just read a bunch of audit results and discuss relevant court cases involving the varies agencies in front of congress and let them rubberstamp it

[-] Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

I wanted to post this channel for a long list of reason, broken down in a forensic manner, as to why this is a bad idea, glad others were here, and thinking the same.

this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2024
765 points (99.1% liked)

News

36366 readers
878 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS