A slew of recent opinions issued from the bench of the United States Supreme Court have given American consumers a handful of underreported victories.

Now unshackled from “Chevron deference” thanks to the majority opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, courts will return to evaluating cases based on direct statutes issued by Congress, rather than deferring to agency bureaucrats who fill in the gaps.

This will recalibrate the vital balance of power in our system that has for too long given more power and authority to the executive branch and its octopus of agencies.

Another significant blow against the administrative state was handed down in SEC v. Jarkesy, which not only restrains the powers of federal agencies but also restores the civil rights of individuals who find themselves in the legal crosshairs of bureaucrats.

Jarkesyundoes existing legislation enabling administrative agencies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), to charge, convict, and penalize people they accuse of wrongdoing in their own administrative courts without juries or proper trials.

The Court found that, in civil cases, the accused has “the right to be tried by a jury of his peers before a neutral adjudicator” because otherwise, Congress could “concentrate the roles of prosecutor, judge, and jury in the hands of the executive branch” — a downright un-American concept.

This is precisely what has been quietly happening for years.

Defendants have not just been denied their Seventh Amendment rights in SEC cases, but they’ve also had to deal with a reckless agency leadership that has further muddied the waters around sound financial regulation to protect consumers.

Under the leadership of Commissioner Gary Gensler, the SEC has become a constant foe of innovative financial and cryptocurrency companies offering consumers exactly what they want.

Whether it be lawsuits, administrative proceedings, murky registration processes, or commission opinions, Gensler’s SEC has faced consistent criticism from lawmakers, entrepreneurs, and analysts who believe he’s gone too far in applying standards and rules that supersede what Congress has legislated.

These enforcement actions, once rare and more targeted in scope, have swelled under Gensler’s tenure.

The SEC is charging companies with “improper registrations” and for not complying with rules and regulations that remain unclear to the industry and their millions of consumers.

The SEC under Gensler hasn’t exactly flown under the radar.

Gensler’s pursuit of cryptocurrency exchanges Coinbase, Kraken, and FinTech firms like Robinhood, has been relentless.

However, during the momentous collapse of the $32 billion crypto exchange FTX and CEO Sam Bankman-Fried’s arrest, Gensler remained silent.

Gensler had met several times with Bankman-Fried to discuss policy.

Billionaire Mark Cuban recently stated that Gary Gensler’s actions could “literally cost Joe Biden the election.”

In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that the SEC’s selection of administrative law judges from within its own staff roster was unconstitutional.

Now, the high court has gone a step further to require that defendants have their rights respected.

By rebalancing power between the branches of our federal government, SCOTUS has empowered consumers and businesses at the disadvantage of Gensler and the SEC, but it will also help reign in the overbearing agenda of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) directed by Lina Khan.

The FTC has also wielded significant authority in pursuing popular American tech and AI companies for their products and services instead of devoting resources to fraud and deception cases nationally.

Whether it be crypto scams that cost people their life savings or massive corporate hacks that endanger millions of Americans’ personal data online, the FTC has focused more elsewhere.

In 2021, the Khan rescinded the consumer welfare standard when it came to evaluating mergers and acquisitions, empowering the FTC to seek even cases that could result in higher prices, less job growth, and less consumer choice.

The FTC has also relied heavily on in-house administrative law judges to adjudicate cases. SCOTUS has handed citizens and businesses more power to fight back against administrative show trials, a victory for consumers and the rule of law.

While it will take far more than one court case to reorient the FTC back to doing what it once did best— protecting consumer welfare — Jarkesy will at the very least prevent Khan from continuing to dismantle popular companies and services without credible judicial review.

The same will apply to other government agencies that continue to steamroll the American consumer. They will no longer be able to conduct much of the shady legal work that has grown their power at the expense of the people, and will instead have to survive a fair, independent judicial process.

Originally published here