Democrats Complain About Reduced Authority of Unelected Bureaucrats to Impose Progressive Policies

 Democrats are expressing frustration over the reduced power of the administrative state—the so-called fourth branch of government managed by unelected bureaucrats in Washington, DC.

Since Lyndon Johnson’s era, Democrats have relied on the administrative state to push their progressive agenda through federal agencies’ rule-making authority, bypassing the legislative process. This authority was notably curtailed earlier this year when the Chevron doctrine was overturned.

Under the Biden-Harris administration, agencies implemented rules on issues like global warming and transgender policies that were not directly enacted by Congress. These rules are now facing legal challenges and being overturned, much to the dismay of Democrats.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) criticized the situation, stating, “We have an extremist Supreme Court with a very political agenda that is willing to overturn decades of precedent. It has changed the legal strategy.”

Dan Glickman, former Agriculture Secretary during the Clinton administration, noted, “Congress is going to have to be much more specific and focused, setting clear boundaries on the legislative agenda so that agencies understand their limits.”

Sharon Block, a Harvard Law School professor and former National Labor Relations Board member from the Obama administration, added, “Limiting the government's ability to enforce protections impacts Democratic priorities more than Republican ones.”

Politico reported that the Supreme Court’s decision to end Chevron—a 40-year legal precedent that restricted judicial interference in complex agency policymaking—was among three recent rulings aimed at curbing Washington’s regulatory power. The conservative majority also diminished the statute of limitations for challenging federal regulations and reduced the authority of internal agency judges.

These court decisions make it more challenging for Kamala Harris to advance the Biden administration’s agenda, even if she succeeds Trump in the presidency. They also complicate efforts to solidify Trump’s policies.

Lower courts have already referenced these rulings in numerous decisions, as noted by the progressive legal group Democracy Forward. This suggests that even if Trump does not win back the presidency, trade groups and corporations have a better chance of contesting regulations from outside the government.

The rise of the administrative state dates back to Woodrow Wilson, who advocated for expanding federal power to include technocrats for rule-making in the rapidly modernizing 20th century. Since Lyndon Johnson's civil rights legislation, Democrats have used the administrative state to enforce their policies, a trend that reached its peak during the Obama administration, as described by Christopher Caldwell in The Age of Entitlement.

Wendell Husebo, a political reporter with Breitbart News and former RNC War Room Analyst, is the author of Politics of Slave Morality.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post