Liberty's Nemesis: The Unchecked Expansion of the State
Dean Reuter, John Yoo
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
In Liberty’s Nemesis, Dean Reuter and John Yoo collect the brightest political minds in the country to expose this explosive, unchecked growth of power in government agencies ranging from health care to climate change, financial markets to immigration, and more. Many Americans have rightly shared the Founders’ fear of excessive lawmaking, but Liberty’s Nemesis is the first book to explain why the concentration of power in administrative agencies in particular is the greatest – and most overlooked – threat to our liberties today.
If we fail to curb it, our constitutional republic might easily devolve into something akin to the statist governments of Europe. President Obama’s ongoing efforts to encourage just such a devolution, and the problems his administration faces as a consequence, present a critical opportunity to defend the original vision of the Constitution.
contravention of those states’ contrary marriage policy. That public policy exception was bolstered by an act of Congress in 1996 and by state statutes or constitutional amendments in roughly three dozen states over the course of the next decade.7 Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996, explicitly noting that the law was adopted in the wake of the Hawaii Supreme Court decision “to protect the right of the States to formulate their own public policy regarding the legal
the Supreme Court upheld this approach in its landmark Brand X decision,27 prompting the FCC to extend the “integrated information service” classification to wireline, wireless, and powerline-provided broadband service.28 Although the agency briefly considered reclassifying broadband Internet access as the bundled provision of telecommunications service and information service in 2010, it quickly backed away.29 | 121 | Executive Interference with a Supposedly Independent Agency The related
Regulation A issuers may serve as a useful model for a tailored reporting regime for other small companies seeking to do an IPO. Whether the Regulation A model or another model is pursued, we would welcome further scaling of the registration requirements of the ’33 Act and the ongoing disclosure requirements of the ’34 Act for smaller public companies—continuing the important work that began with the IPO on-ramp of the JOBS Act.47 Undue regulation should not be the reason a viable company chooses
education publication Inside Higher Ed, called the April 2011 Dear Colleague letter “a 19-page document that at best complicates my work, at worst undermines my judgment and my ability to make good decisions for my institution and my students,” and noted, “I do not appreciate having my hands tied by the presumption of guilt the Dear Colleague Letter portrays.”31 The April 2011 Dear Colleague letter likely violated the APA by creating new substantive rules without providing for notice and comment
political branches, however, have created serious obstacles to effective and appropriate judicial review of the regulatory process. To begin with, Congress has routinely passed vague laws that grant agencies extraordinarily flexible powers that are both unwise and constitutionally troublesome. Judicial deference to agency interpretations of these laws has magnified this problem to an extreme degree. Although originally intended as a means of curtailing judicial activism, Chevron17 and associated