OPINION:
“Supreme Court takes up challenges to federal agencies’ supercharged power” (Web, Nov. 17) states that the main crux of two upcoming cases is a “decades-old precedent that gives the federal government significant leeway in implementing rules and regulations.”
While the Supreme Court — in its capacity as the third leg of the U.S. government’s checks and balances paradigm — is the highest court in the land to settle disputes, is this really the right avenue for disputes such as these?
Congress writes prospective laws and has the duty of oversight of the Executive Branch in the execution of those laws. Shouldn’t disputes such as what is discussed in this article go to Congress under its oversight responsibility?
It seems Congress has lost much of its power, with the executive branch grabbing most of it and the Supreme Court taking on this oversight mission.
The House and Senate each have committees with oversight responsibilities of various functions spelled out in our laws. Shouldn’t questions of specific oversight fall to them instead of the Supreme Court? Granted, these committees’ time could be taken up completely if each of these questions was brought before the appropriate committee as a whole. But each committee could designate various members as a panel with jurisdiction in a certain area. Then the members, not their staffs, could resolve the questions of oversight.
Congress has, for the past few decades, been unable to even complete a primary designated mission to create the 12 appropriations bills that form the basis for the U.S. budget. All its members seem to be able to do is take breaks to return to their districts to work on their reelections.
It is time for them to take pride in their constitutional duties and their place in the U.S. government.
JAMES KOUT
Bowie, Maryland
Please read our comment policy before commenting.