Trump EO Tries To Destroy Whatever Corporate Regulatory Oversight Hasn’t Been Already Killed By DOGE And The Supreme Court

from the dunning-kruger-the-country-to-death dept

Welcome to the golden age of corruption.

Last year I warned repeatedly how a concussive series of Supreme Court rulings like Loper Bright were poised to dismantle already shaky regulatory authority and corporate oversight, turning most U.S. regulators into the legal and policy equivalent of decorative seasonal gourds. It was the ultimate victory in a generational war on accountability by consolidated corporate power and rich assholes.

Falsely framed as some sort of “noble rebalancing of constitutional authority” by bad faith lobbyists and think tankers, the goal wasn’t “balanced regulation” or “reining in out of control regulators,” it was the dismantling of nearly all meaningful corporate oversight. So even before Trump won the election, labor rights, consumer protection, environmental law, and public safety were already in very serious trouble.

Now Trump has come out with an Executive Order that attempts to finish the job. The misleadingly named “Ensuring Accountability For All Agencies” effectively tries to declare that no U.S. regulatory agency can do much of anything without the explicit approval of a mad king.

An accompanying “fact sheet” proclaims that “so called” agencies like the FCC and FTC will not be able to take any actions that contradict the will of the President:

“No employee of the executive branch acting in their official capacity may advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion on a matter of law, including but not limited to the issuance of regulations, guidance, and positions advanced in litigation, unless authorized to do so by the President or in writing by the Attorney General.”

The EO requires that all U.S. regulatory agencies must “submit for review all proposed and final significant regulatory actions to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Executive Office of the President before publication in the Federal Register.” It also declares the President will “adjust so-called independent agencies’ apportionments to ensure tax dollars are spent wisely.”

It basically ensures that even if our captured regulators did somehow come up with a coherent proposal that challenges corporate power (already a rarity thanks to the corrupt, revolving door nature of most agencies), the President has the exclusive right to kill it, regardless of whether or not it’s within the confines of Congressional approval, or broadly, democratically popular.

Corporations last year had already lobbied successfully for the Supreme Court reversal of the Chevron Doctrine, which declared that regulatory agencies (with the kind of specific subject matter Congressmen like Ted Cruz usually lack) were free to interpret, craft, and enforce rules governing their sectors — so long as they’re within the confines of the law.

The axing of Chevron had already made it so regulators can’t do much of anything without the explicit approval of Congress. Proponents wanted you to ignore that Congress and our court system are too corrupt to function, ensuring that pretty much anything that challenges corporate or billionaire power will be declared radical and simply a bridge too far.

Companies all over the U.S. were quick to use the Supreme Court’s latest rulings to basically declare that regulators no longer have any authority to do anything, whether that’s imposing tougher pollution standards on energy companies, ending discrimination in healthcare, or trying to force your wireless carrier to keep your cellphone unlocked.

These efforts will steadily have disastrous downstream impacts that will kill people at scale across countless sectors. But most of the media coverage I read about it has a bizarre, clinical detachment that puts the reader to sleep by the fourth paragraph, and fails to convey any sense of the dire stakes at play.

Despite what big companies and billionaires might tell you, U.S. regulators have already been on the ropes for years. They’re generally understaffed, under-funded, stocked with only the kind of dull careerists that can survive the corrupt congressional nomination process (see: what happened to Gigi Sohn), and boxed in by industry lobbying, a very broken Congress, and a steady parade of shitty court rulings.

I’ve covered the FCC for decades. The agency rarely actually tries to seriously protect consumers. And when it does try (net neutrality, privacy), those efforts routinely never last long in the face of corruption. Real consumer protection almost uniformly fails. Still, somehow in Republican and Libertarian circles a narrative has long been entrenched that agencies like the FCC have been “running amok.”

That narrative persists because of its value in selling a lie: what most of these billionaires and companies want isn’t reasonable regulation, or sensible, well crafted oversight: it’s no oversight whatsoever. Freedom to rip off consumers, to pollute, to violate labor law, and to generally misbehave in the quest for improved quarterly earnings with zero accountability. Freedom to “innovate” and acquire and consume and expand with zero concern about the downstream impact of bad choices.

As I saw these efforts unfolding last year I got increasingly vocal about it, but was often met by an arched eyebrow by cocksure policy tut-scolds, drunk on normalization bias, confident that the system would hold. Well, the system is not holding. We’re entering the golden age of fraud and corruption.

As with everything Trump, this is extremely legally dodgy and will indisputably see a court challenge. But collectively between this, DOGE, and the Supreme Court’s locked-in majority, it’s hard to believe U.S. regulators will coherently function with any sort of independence from corporate power and petulant billionaires for a very, very long time.

Even under the best case scenario where the electorate tires of the coming cascading system failures and puts an end to our dipshit kakistocracy, reversing the damage in a system now specifically designed to prevent progressive reform will be a very steep uphill climb.

That’s not to say we can’t survive and build better things. The destruction of coherent federal governance shifts most battles to the local and state level. The country can still function as a loose assortment of fractured nation states each with their varying degrees of labor protection, consumer rights, and environmental protection. Which state you live in suddenly matters more than ever.

But for now, any dream of unified, federal coherence or corporate oversight has been murdered by a loose collection of sociopaths and self-serving Dunning Kruger hustlebros, keen on stripping and selling the American experiment for scrap off the back loading dock.

Filed Under: , , , , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Trump EO Tries To Destroy Whatever Corporate Regulatory Oversight Hasn’t Been Already Killed By DOGE And The Supreme Court”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
27 Comments

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Koby (profile) says:

Fourth Branch

What is being described is Bureaucracy Capture. It is the concept that the individual workers at the various agencies somehow have more authority and power than does the President. They do not (Article 2 first sentence).

The hope amongst the deep state was that if they could get enough of their people into the jobs, then they would become immune to elections. Noone could fire them, or audit their finances, or vote them out of office. This new branch of government would be completely unaccountable, a fiefdom unto itself, that could declare its own proclamations and policies.

The deep state would have been better off allowing Trump to directly serve a second consecutive term. They would have avoided the house cleaning.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Bloof (profile) says:

Re:

There is no deep state, there never was a deep stte. Nothing happening to the US government now would happen if there was a shadowy cabal in place that run things regardless of the will of the people. What people like Trump meant when they aaid deep state was people with expertise and experience who will speak out when things are illegal, immoral or just play wrongheaded, the people now being fired and replaced with loyalists with the goal of creating a deep state, filling what remains of government with unelected, unfirable DeJoy like figures whoe goal is to damage everything arohnd them and create chaos for anyone who follows Trump should they by some miracle find a way to remove hi .

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Koby's Drug Dealer says:

Re:

The minute I hear ‘deep state’, I know you’re an idiot.
The entire term ‘deep state’ was created by Bannon after he workshopped it with focus groups before Trump’s 2016 run.

The only ‘deep state’ is Trump himself and now Musk.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3

At some point 77 million Trump voters, tracked from the results of the 2016 and 2024 elections, will have to have their right to vote reduced or suspended entirely.

You cannot diplomatically resolve fascism, once someone has fallen to it they cannot be saved (in any reasonable capacity at scale) even if they are backstabbed by their allies. They also can’t be trusted either, as countrymen or in determining governing policy.

At some point you Nuremburg Trial all 77 million of them within the next decade or you don’t have a functioning country (or at least you keep maybe 4 blue states and fuck the rest because you cannot protect that much countryside from themselves)

The one thing Democratic Socialism hasn’t tried is the one thing they will be forced to: exploit Right-wing governing weaknesses, seize the corrupted tools they created, use them against MAGA, before reforming them, implement an authoritarian-left state with a gradual changeover to proper center-left Democratic Socialism.

Trying the Obama Administration years/approach again is not something I personally will abide by when the time comes and the fascism invariably collapses in on itself. (There are not enough factors in place for Trump to pull a Putin and still hand it off properly to a successor)

Anonymous Coward says:

I’m less concerned about the regulatory impact of this than the legal one. How exactly can the executive prohibit members of the executive branch from advancing an “an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion”?

Like, I get that this is basically a rule against defying the Big Man In Charge but what is the Supreme Court? Chopped liver? If SCOTUS tells you what the correct interpretation of something is (and they are, by the very definition, correct when they do so) then is this EO mandating the commission of a crime? Further, what are the hapless civil servants of the executive branch supposed to do if Trump and his AG have conflicting opinions? Either with each other or, in Trump’s case in particular, with himself five minutes ago.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

What will be left of the US in Four Years?

Unfortunately, our current system mostly depends on people following the law. Lots of laws “outlaw” something but rely on law enforcement agencies to enforce the law. Anyone who tries to enforce laws the Orange Idiot doesn’t like just get fired. After all, he’s famous most for going bankrupt and yelling “You’re Fired” on TV. Now, we’ve got millions of federal employees who can’t afford to be jobless bowing to the Orange Idiot. So, there’s SCOTUS that a majority of the members were appointed (for life) by him, renegades willing to storm the Capital at his call, corporate brunch lords willing to do anything to make more money, and the average citizen that sees that “two plus two is actually four” with little power to take down the billionaires that are in charge.
Unless the Orange Idiot manages to change the two term rule (or just ignore it as he does for so many laws), our only hope is that there is enough left to rebuild our true democracy in four years.
Is there any chance the US will make it until then and how much damage will need to be repaired by the next administration.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

millions of federal employees who can’t afford to be jobless

Ah, point of order.

A fired employee can do nothing to report on conditions in their workplace.

And… An employee with critical knowledge of their department’s workings takes that knowledge with them when they go.

And finally… Because of how DOGE is forcing these firings at a moment’s notice, some of those employees cannot be reached if “DOGE realizes it overstepped” (qv National Nuclear Security Agency).

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
james burkhardt says:

I was watching a video on the more perfect union youtube channel about crypto. An impactful line for me was proceeded by Crypto lobbiests saying CFPB never gave them clear rules to work within.

It then cuts to a former admin with the CFPB saying they gave clear rules, the problem was the rules interfered with what crypto wants to do.

As always, the venn diagram what corporations consider ‘burdensome’ and ‘confusing’ regulation and what most americans would consider common sense, is mostly a circle.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

“It then cuts to a former admin with the CFPB saying they gave clear rules, the problem was the rules interfered with what crypto wants to do.”

Of course. Crypto is explicitly designed and intended to be fake money for criminals, so reasonable people with any sense of ethics oppose it. And that’s unacceptable to the greedy sociopaths who desperately want to be rich no matter the consequences.

So now they’re going to get their way, and a lot of people WILL suffer and WILL die as a result. The crypto thugs will disclaim responsibility and make excuses, they’ll lie and equivocate, they’ll blame someone else, they’ll do anything but take responsibility because they’re incapable of doing so.

Anonymous Coward says:

As I saw these efforts unfolding last year I got increasingly vocal about it, but was often met by an arched eyebrow by cocksure policy tut-scolds, drunk on normalization bias, confident that the system would hold. Well, the system is not holding. We’re entering the golden age of fraud and corruption.

I do remember seeing dipshits like Ari Cohn try to say that you were wrong. I hope that he and everyone else at corporate and Trump shill orgs like TechFreedom and NetChoice get hit with the consequences of wide-scale deregulation just like everyone else.

And I do hope that from now on, we treat the word “innovation” as the meaningless lobbyist buzzword that it’s become.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...