←back to thread

376 points indus | 0 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
binarymax ◴[] No.41915815[source]
Don’t worry, a judge in Texas in the pocket of some big company will shoot this down, just like the attempt to abolish non-competes
replies(1): >>41916027 #
renegade-otter[dead post] ◴[] No.41916027[source]
[flagged]
stronglikedan ◴[] No.41916314[source]
> the SCOTUS judges are the de facto experts of all matters and the regulators

And thankfully so.

replies(1): >>41916899 #
kccoder ◴[] No.41916899[source]
Curious why you think these nine individuals are better suited than people with actual expertise?

In the ruling in which they self-ordained these new powers, Gorsuch confused nitrous oxide with nitrogen oxide, five times. Better hope Gorsuch didn't rule on dental anesthetics on your next visit to the dentist.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-supreme-court...

replies(2): >>41917018 #>>41917491 #
Ajedi32 ◴[] No.41917491[source]
Because allowing the "people with actual expertise" to decide for themselves how much power they have over the lives of others is a blatantly obvious conflict of interest?
replies(1): >>41917933 #
renegade-otter ◴[] No.41917933{3}[source]
As opposed to the judges who fly on donor private jets and then take the cases of the said donors. No conflict of interest there. Zero. And, oh yeah, zero enforceable ethics rules.

The disdain for expertise is something I would not expect on HN, but here we are.

replies(1): >>41918447 #

(no comments)