Three little paragraphs on THE RULE OF LAW and Obama's EPA

Obama regulators have been punishing U.S. business in violation of the law and beyond what Congress intended. Tuesday's ruling proves their point and underscores how much more damaging the EPA could be without re-election restraint in a second Obama term.

The court's decision states it plainly: "Absent a claim of constitutional authority (and there is none here), executive agencies may exercise only the authority conferred by statute, and agencies may not transgress statutory limits on that authority." [THIS IS A PITHY AND SUBTLE RESTATEMENT OF THE RULE OF LAW UNDER THE U.S. CONSTITUTION:  AGENCIES CANNOT EXCEED THEIR CONGRESSIONALLY AUTHORIZED POWERS.  WHO KNEW??? (not Obama)]

The message is that regulators must follow the laws of the United States. Why do federal judges constantly have to remind EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson of this basic principle?

A version of this article appeared August 22, 2012, on page A10 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: EPA Smack-Down Number Six.

A. Thinker