Future Retirement Success
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks
  • Politics
  • Business
  • Investing
  • Stocks

Future Retirement Success

Investing

OSHA Is Unconstitutional

by March 1, 2024
March 1, 2024
OSHA Is Unconstitutional

Thomas A. Berry and Nathaniel Lawson

The Framers of the Constitution understood that the separation of powers is “essential to the preservation of liberty.” In line with this understanding, the Constitution was designed to ensure that no single branch of government could accumulate too much undivided power. The Constitution thus vests “all legislative Powers” in Congress, vests the executive power in the president, and vests the judicial power in the federal courts. Critical to this design is the “nondelegation doctrine,” which prohibits Congress from blurring these lines by delegating its legislative power to the executive branch.

The Occupational Safety and Health Act (the OSHA Act) violates the nondelegation doctrine by granting the executive branch virtually unlimited policymaking authority. The OSHA Act grants the secretary of labor the authority to impose any “occupational safety and health standard” so long as it is “reasonably necessary or appropriate to provide safe or healthful employment and places of employment.” The secretary has delegated this power to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

Through this statutory language, the OSHA Act grants the executive branch regulatory authority over essentially every American business. The only restriction on this regulatory discretion is that OSHA must deem its regulation to be “reasonable,” but in practice that is no restriction at all. No other statute grants an agency such a broad authority with such complete discretion.

For these reasons, an Ohio business has challenged the OSHA Act as an unconstitutional violation of the nondelegation doctrine. The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit rejected that challenge, but the business has petitioned the US Supreme Court for review. And Cato has filed an amicus brief supporting that petition.

Our brief recounts that for most of the last century, the Supreme Court has held that a delegation of authority complies with the nondelegation doctrine so long as it provides the executive branch with an “intelligible principle” to guide its discretion. But there is serious reason to doubt whether this lenient standard adequately protects against Congress delegating its legislative power. Before the New Deal era, the traditional standard in nondelegation cases was more strict, requiring Congress to decide major questions of policy and permitting the executive only to “fill up the details.”

But even under the lenient “intelligible principle” standard, the OSHA Act violates the nondelegation doctrine. In Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan (1935), the Supreme Court provided a two‐​part test to determine whether a statute violates the nondelegation doctrine: “(1) ‘whether the Congress has required any finding by the President in the exercise of the authority,’ and (2) ‘whether the Congress has set up a standard for the President’s action.’” 

The OSHA Act meets neither of these requirements. The Act’s “reasonably necessary or appropriate” language is even more vague than other provisions that have been upheld by the Supreme Court in previous nondelegation challenges. And unlike those upheld statutes, the OSHA Act provides no criteria binding OSHA’s discretion beyond that language.

Admittedly, the question whether a statute has crossed the line and unconstitutionally delegated legislative power can at times be difficult to discern. But as the Supreme Court itself has made clear, “the inherent difficulty of line‐​drawing is no excuse for not enforcing the Constitution.” The Court should take this case and get back in the business of meaningfully enforcing the nondelegation doctrine.

0
FacebookTwitterGoogle +Pinterest
previous post
Spotting Tradable Pullbacks after Trend Reversing Surges
next post
Elon Musk sues ChatGPT-maker OpenAI over Microsoft links given Non-Profit Mission

You may also like

In 1932-33 Leading Intellectuals Used ‘Dictatorial’ as a...

September 21, 2023

The Libertarian behind the World’s First Freedom of...

May 23, 2023

Do Family Leave Policies Work?

August 23, 2024

Parsing the Factual Errors in the Montana Climate...

August 21, 2023

The President Has a Duty to End the...

March 21, 2025

Improving Youth Online Safety While Preserving Consumer Choice...

June 20, 2023

Should Governments Fund Research?

February 18, 2025

Government Debt Varies Widely by State

July 19, 2024

Libertarians and DOGE Anxiety Disorder

March 28, 2025

11 Charts Showing How Canada/Mexico Tariffs Would Harm...

February 28, 2025

    Get free access to all of the retirement secrets and income strategies from our experts! or Join The Exclusive Subscription Today And Get the Premium Articles Acess for Free

    By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

    Recent Posts

    • Trump asks SCOTUS to uphold freeze on billions in USAID payments

      August 27, 2025
    • Three Years of Sounding the Debt Alarm at Cato and on the Debt Dispatch

      August 27, 2025
    • Trump Administration Rightly Attacks EU Tech Regulations but Tariffs and Censorship at Home Harm Americans 

      August 27, 2025
    • White House demands all Gaza hostages return home ‘this week’ amid stalled talks

      August 27, 2025
    • Bankruptcy, Hell, and Exit Barriers

      August 27, 2025
    • Trump’s DC Death Penalty Crusade Threatens More Tyranny of the Minority

      August 27, 2025

    Categories

    • Business (8,897)
    • Investing (2,246)
    • Politics (16,501)
    • Stocks (3,228)
    • About us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Disclaimer: futureretirementsuccess.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

    Copyright © 2025 futureretirementsuccess.com | All Rights Reserved