There are some good points in this, and the ending is particularly strong, but he shuts down some critical arguments about the ability of government to function, that shouldn’t be overlooked.

Some of the commentary over the weekend talked about the case ending “Chevron deference” and other recent Court actions as reducing the power of executive branch agencies. That’s the wrong way to think about it.

Instead he says the problem is that this stops Congress from functioning. I strongly disagree. Sure, Congress funds the agencies and sets up the broad regulatory framework, but it is almost entirely the executive agencies and their experts who have been entrusted with the latitude to interpret Congress’ often vague and imprecise goals, using science and deep institutional expertise. The end of Chevron deference will go down as the structural change to government that allows it to be fully corrupted and ineffective. When it’s no longer the experts and scientists who get to decide how to deal with incredibly complicated issues, issues that are well beyond the understanding of a few zealots in robes, we no longer have a government based on anything but the whims of those zealots.