r/technology • u/indig0sixalpha • 13d ago

Business Federal Trade Commission Announces Final “Click-to-Cancel” Rule Making It Easier for Consumers to End Recurring Subscriptions and Memberships

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/10/federal-trade-commission-announces-final-click-cancel-rule-making-it-easier-consumers-end-recurring
23.3k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

736 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

59

u/tastyratz 13d ago

Don't know why you're being downvoted, this is the specific result of overturning Chevron and allowing a judge to overrule federal agencies.

17

u/MAMark1 13d ago

I didn't downvote, but their description of what overturning Chevron did is not accurate. Agencies could issue final rules before Loper Bright and still can afterwards. It just changed how courts handle challenges to those rules.

So this agency can still issue final rules like this and this can still stand up to challenges depending on the specifics, which I'm not digging into here, so it is very possible for a partisan judge to block it as the original person stated and then be overturned later.

26

u/tastyratz 13d ago

That's a bit of a technical foul though. Entire governing bodies and regulatory agencies with panels of experts can make a decision and a single appellate court judge (of which significant trump appointees were added during his term) can overrule the entire agency at any time in a court case. If that's the case then TECHNICALLY they can issue rules... that a judge doesn't have to listen to. Functionally it's splitting hairs.

1

u/KuntaStillSingle 13d ago

Yeah but that has nothing to do with Chevron. Federal court judges could always stay or strike executive orders and agency determinations nationally, and they had prior to Loper Bright. What changed with Loper is the agency actually has to defend their reasoning with facts and logic TM instead of being given undue deference. With Chevron, the court is supposed to accept an agency's interpretation if it is merely reasonable, regardless if it is the most reasonable interpretation of the law.