No. of Recommendations: 0
Given that language, if someone wants to argue that the regulatory agency choosing the penalty level of 1% is beyond its power and that such decisions require legislative clarity, that concern makes perfect sense. However, if an affected business is attempting to argue that the regulatory agency has no authority to define acceptable emissions levels or the exact nature of the test used to measure emissions, those are NOT topics more suited for a JUDGE to decide. A trial judge or appeals court judge assigned at random to a lawsuit filed by a business is NOT likely to be expert in the subject matter. It can be argued that by the agency being managed by an elected President, an administrator in that agency has more accountability to the public's current preferred interpretation of any ambiguities than a judge.
That is how it looks to me, too, though Albaby1 whose opinion I respect sees it differently. I just do not believe that courts, at least in many complex cases, have the level of expertise that experienced and knowledgable civil servants do. And, as you say, it seems this will make it very hard to effectively regulate many activities that DO NEED TO BE REGULATED.
