Justice Clarence Thomas argued that OSHA's authority was unconstitutional. He dissented from the court's decision to reject a challenge to the agency.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has set his sights on eliminating the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday announced which cases it would consider next and which it wouldn’t. Among those the court rejected was a case that challenged the authority of OSHA, which sets and enforces standards for health and safety in the workplace.

And Thomas, widely considered to be the most conservative justice on the already mostly conservative court, wasn’t happy.

In a dissent, he explained why he believed the high court should’ve taken the case: OSHA’s power, he argues, is unconstitutional.

  • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    16·
    3 days ago

    I used to argue that whoever was ultimately responsible for safety at a chemical plant should be required to have them and their family live close enough that if shot goes wrong, they’ll definitely be among the worst effected.

    But then I live within the greater Charleston, WV area, and there’s a plant in a town called Institute here that makes and handles MIC, most notoriously known for being made less poisonous for use as pesticide and being the stuff that leaked and caused the Bhopal incident back when.

    • nifty@lemmy.world
      1·
      3 days ago

      People should sue for damages if they have a case. Same for the Supreme Court ruling, I guess? It would make sense if someone sues the SC for something they suffer

      • Natanael@slrpnk.net
        1·
        3 days ago

        They have immunity for the effect of their rulings (unless it’s criminal corruption involved, but they get to decide for themselves that it’s just “gratuities”, unless congress impeach them)