I wonder what the effect of West Virginia v. EPA will have on drone regs...

[ManicMavicManiac]

With West Virginia v. EPA it is clear that a regulatory agency cannot legislate, all rules must go through congress. Surprised this isn't being discussed as this ruling has implications that stem far outside the EPA and can be applicable toward any regulatory body. I know there are current court challenges, and it should be interesting to see what happens here. This could eliminate the need for a commercial license. Maybe some legal eagles could elaborate more.

 

[sar104]

You have misunderstood the ruling in that case, which was not that federal agencies cannot regulate, but rather that there are limits to their statutory authority to do so, in particular if the regulations are judged to fall under the major questions doctrine.

That's not going to be the case here since (1) it is not credibly going to fall under the major questions doctrine and (2) the FAA was not only authorized, but directed by congress, to regulate sUAS operations under PUBLIC LAW 112–95 and the general provisions of 49 U.S.C. 106(f).

 

[mrreddog]

I was hoping this ruling would have legs too....Bummer.
Is RDQ lawsuit still under review??

 

[Chip]

Is RDQ lawsuit still under review??

Yes.

 

[Vic Moss]

With West Virginia v. EPA it is clear that a regulatory agency cannot legislate, all rules must go through congress. Surprised this isn't being discussed as this ruling has implications that stem far outside the EPA and can be applicable toward any regulatory body. I know there are current court challenges, and it should be interesting to see what happens here. This could eliminate the need for a commercial license. Maybe some legal eagles could elaborate more.

Since Congress gave the FAA their marching orders to come up regulations (including RID), this will have zero affect on 107 or 44809. Misapplied logic.