The Supreme Court Wants to Revive a Doctrine That Would Paralyze Biden’s Administration

Joe Biden promised us an FDR-sized presidency—starting with bold action to halt the spread of COVID-19, end the worst economic downturn in decades, and stop the climate crisis. Biden could use regulation and executive action to move quickly to decarbonize the economy, cancel student loan debt, and raise wages. But a Biden administration has an even bigger problem than two long-shot special elections in Georgia: the new 6–3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court may soon burn down the federal government’s regulatory powers. …

But last year, in a case called Gundy v. United States, four conservative justices announced that they wanted to bring the nondelegation doctrine back to life. Gundy arose out of a national sex offender registry law that explicitly applied to everyone convicted after the law took effect but delegated authority to the Department of Justice to determine when and how it applied to people convicted before the law took effect. Herman Gundy, who was convicted before the registry law took effect, argued that the law violated the nondelegation doctrine. The court upheld the law. But in a dissent joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the court should revive the dormant nondelegation doctrine.* Gorsuch’s dissent argued that Congress may only delegate policymaking power to agencies under three narrow circumstances: to “fill up the details” of a legislative scheme; for executive fact-finding to determine the application of a rule; and to assign nonlegislative responsibilities to the executive and judicial branches. Justice Samuel Alito wrote separately to say he’d like to “reconsider” the nondelegation doctrine—just not in a case about sex offenders’ rights. Full Article

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Our former Top U.S. National security Advisor Lt. General Flynn had some interesting to say in an interview with !ou Dobbs this evening(Thu) regarding the use of our nations surveillance programs, both foreign & domestc. Long before the gener’s criminal case, Sex offenders were the first sold out to electronic surveillance saints and in many ways defines the blurred lines between proper versus improper \ constitutional v unconstitutional uses of the infrastructure to maintain civil authority. In many ways a States’ ability to indenture of citizens to database property clears the way for other onerous, but presumably civil, uses including election tampering.
Most of the advantages, however are not wrought by the pure surveillance, rather the benefits derived from the analysis of collectives of databases are far greater. That is how you harvest votes.

While they’re at it, maybe they can reign in the use of “interstate commerce” to claim jurisdiction over things which clearly are not commerce at all, like me walking across a state line and into a neighboring state. SORNA only exists if the feds have jurisdiction, which they shouldn’t under any sane definition of commerce.

When did this become a pro Biden website?? Its people like me, who is libertarian, that wants limited government!! The ones on the left including Biden thats always for an over reaching government!! I’m for very limited government whether its pertains to sor or guns or marriage!! When a government that has no bounds gets involved it screws everything up!!

@Hambone, @Dustin, I agree and agree. I will add the L party is the only party that sees the registry for what it is as well. If people learned a little more about L policies they would not be so concerned if something like this were to happen. Personally I hope it does happen.

Sex offenders aren’t Republicans or Democrats their sex offenders plane and simple the only time we are acknowledge by these politicians is when they got their boot on our necks to show the public they mean business.
I wonder how many sex offenders still vote its hallreus how people forced to register still wanna be apart of society sex offenders need to wake up and realize Society hates you your unwanted and uninvited.

Good luck

How noble of Justice Alito saying, “ he’s willing to consider a revisit of the doctrine, as long as it doesn’t involve those people.” Yup the registry is punishment and it’s a damn shame when justices don’t follow the constitution. Registry America’s experiment for the government to see how much they can get away with.

If Biden is lucky enough to weather the contested election process and be inaugurated, he will have smooth sailing as they will simply pack the Supreme Court with at least four, and more likely six, more progressive justices by summer, which makes this entire article moot. (And if the court were as “conservative” as it is purported to be, then they would have at least heard the cases where the contested election process.)

Incidentally, a Biden (or, more likely by March, a Harris) Administration will wreak havoc on registered sex offender laws around the country, as criminal justice becomes more politicized rather than adhere to rigid constitutional authority. In short, justice by the mob will prevail; and guess who’s at the bottom of the list?

You guys reviving of doctrines is good in many ways or should one take the 4 Steps in Criminal Justice. 1. Were these laws written early enough to have been written by the eye wittness … Oh if its a computer ordeal than there is no eye wittness or is thei. In Physical ordeal their can be an eye wittness or even that victim yelling rape in some cases. 2. Were they (law, government, etc) colabratting with internal evidence or external evidence. 3 Did ths law change or did not change by some oversight with new laws. Even sex offenders have rights to speak up.

4. Last but not least.. do authorities have any reason to lie about anything, or be bias to a lie in these registry issues.Now that is a test for anything or doctrine or law. So what is the reason anyone lies… Is it for sex, money, or power or who is using the sword unjustly?

Now I have never liked to vote but Biden is here to stay. We all have our troubles in this registry and we can’t be judging out of context can we are we all just as concieted as the next person or who is using coercion, persuasion, or belittling one today.