• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    6 months ago

    Getting rid of Chevron puts the entire environment at risk. Now any case of a corporation spewing out any sort of toxic crap anywhere doesn’t end up getting halted by the EPA, it gets put in front of a judge. And believe me, it will only take a few of those before we get to “corporations are presidents, my friend” in terms of what they can legally get away with.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Sort of. Chevron wasn’t good either. It put the expertise on the corporations in the field. The way to correct it would be to put expertise on the regulating bodies, like the EPA.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Better than what we have now. Unless you think the corporatist courts will even end up ruling in favor of the plaintiffs.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          They already were favoring the defense by designating them the experts. The Chevron Deference was determined when the court ruled that they should defer to Chevron’s expertise when they were defending their case, since no one understood the field as well as they did.

          It’s just trading one broken system for another. Both are completely asinine and corrupt.