This website uses cookies to improve your experience.

Please enable cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website

Sign the petition

to call for a

Convention of States!

signatures
Columns Default Settings

COS Can Promote SCOTUS Uniformity

Published in Blog on June 19, 2024 by Stanley E Gilewicz

COS Can Promote SCOTUS Uniformity?

"Laws must be clear, precise, and uniform for all citizens". - Marquis de Lafayette

SCOTUS disappointment

Back in October of 2023 the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) declined to hear arguments from a group of 12 states (State of Missouri, et al. v. Joseph R. Biden) contesting the validity of an executive order (EO) establishing social costs from greenhouse gases. Two years earlier SCOTUS had found for West Virginia in its objection to EPA’s Clean Power Plan.

Both cases involve states rights against executive overreach and request court relief from expected economic damages. The similarity ends there however.

In WV v. EPA the court invoked the “major questions doctrine” and determined that EPA’s regulatory regime would have significant economic impact and required Congressional approval. For Missouri v. Biden, SCOTUS declined to accept the case due to a “lack of standing”. Note that the denial by SCOTUS was given without explanation.

Legal limbo
The opening quotation from the Marquis de Lafayette was a foremost concern in the minds of our Constitutional framers. If the law is not “clear, precise and uniform” then it is of little use and will be abused/ignored. SCOTUS had a clear “major questions doctrine” precedent to justify hearing Missouri v. Biden but left the nation confused by declining without explanation.

Missouri could have provided stark clarity on separation of powers. Instead SCOTUS once again used “lack of standing” to avoid clarifying a contentious issue (2020 Election). Why? Was it because WV targeted an executive agency while Missouri was aimed at an EO? We are left guessing because of a lack of “uniform” case acceptance criteria.

 

 

How to promote uniformity 
There are two approaches to promoting uniform case criteria. The first involves resolving a landmark SCOTUS ruling from 1984. The second requires amending the United States Constitution. Each has its own benefits and downsides.

 

 

Approach One: Revisit Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (Chevron)

In the 1984 Chevron ruling, SCOTUS allowed executive agencies to construct regulatory law if underlying statutes from congress are ambiguous. Over the last 40 years the “ambiguity” of this ruling has been used by executive branch agencies to bypass congress and the judiciary.

SCOTUS has agreed to hear two cases in conjunction that directly challenge regulatory overreach under Chevron. In effect SCOTUS can rescind the tools of regulatory overreach while promoting uniformity of criteria.

Benefit: SCOTUS can mandate that ambiguous law require congressional clarification rather than allow agency interpretation. This can be decided in 2024 and stop executive overreach overnight.

Downside: SCOTUS rulings may be overturned by subsequent courts. They are not necessarily permanent.

Approach Two: Article V Convention of States

The issue of “standing” and its possible use/misuse regarding states rights can be made moot through use of an Article V Convention of States. During the Simulated Article V Convention of August 2023, it was proposed that the several states be empowered with guaranteed standing.

Federal Term Limits & Judicial Jurisdiction (Proposal 2, Section 2) and Federal Legislative & Executive Jurisdiction (Proposal 2, Sections 1 through 4) clearly reserve states rights before the court as proposed Constitutional Amendments.

Benefit: The successful passage of these amendments would be both irrevocable and straightforward. SCOTUS will no longer have wiggle room for deciding “standing” in case criteria.

Downside: Much damage has already occurred under non-uniform application of SCOTUS case criteria. An Article V convention will require significant time to achieve.

The Hope
The best case scenario for reconciling SCOTUS’ non-uniform application of case criteria would be for a successful rewrite/revocation of Chevron (temporarily hold the line on executive overreach) while the COS applications work their way towards the required 34 states to accomplish a permanent resolution.

If you believe that each state has a right to present its concerns before the highest court in the land please sign the COS petition and help speed the Article V process along to make it a reality.

Sign the petition to call for an Article V convention!

2,667,938 signatures

Petition your state legislator

Almost everyone knows that our federal government is on a dangerous course. The unsustainable debt combined with crushing regulations on states and businesses is a recipe for disaster.

What is less known is that the Founders gave state legislatures the power to act as a final check on abuses of power by Washington, DC. Article V of the U.S. Constitution authorizes the state legislatures to call a convention to proposing needed amendments to the Constitution. This process does not require the consent of the federal government in Washington DC.

I support Convention of States; a national movement to call a convention under Article V of the United States Constitution, restricted to proposing amendments that will impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit its power and jurisdiction, and impose term limits on its officials and members of Congress.

I want our state to be one of the necessary 34 states to pass a resolution calling for this kind of an Article V convention. You can find a copy of the model resolution and the Article V Pocket Guide (which explains the process and answers many questions) here: https://conventionofstates.com/handbook_pdf

I ask that you support Convention of States and consider becoming a co-sponsor. Please respond to my request by informing the national COS team of your position, or sending them any questions you may have:

info@conventionofstates.com or (540) 441-7227.

Thank you so much for your service to the people of our district.

Respectfully, [Your Name]

By checking this box, you agree to receive text messages sent via an “autodialer”. Our text messages are intended to inform you of events, calls to action, volunteering opportunities, and other matters pertaining to self-governance. Text STOP to stop receiving messages. Text HELP for more info. Message frequency varies. Message and data rates may apply. View Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Provide your full address and we will deliver your petition directly to your state legislators now and again during the legislative sessions, Free of Charge. We Protect your privacy.

We welcome all US citizens to support our movement by signing the petition. To deliver the petition to your state legislators, you must enter your full address, which must be within one of the 50 states. For military personnel serving overseas, or for expatriates, enter your Voting Residence Address .

Please be sure to check the "Send me email updates" box, and include your phone number above.

How did you hear about us:

Click here to get involved!
Convention of states action

Are you sure you don't want emailed updates on our progress and local events? We respect your privacy, but we don't want you to feel left out!

Processing...