question: Why did the green new deal get repealed?
comment: The Green New Deal was largely bogus. It was feel-good measures that didn't really have a chance of succeeding. The most ludicrous by far was the ten-year timeframe for converting the entire country to 'renewable' energy. There's no way that could work without heavy reliance on traditional energy sources; there's nothing that can take up the load but nuclear, and the American people are way too gun-shy about nuclear power.
passages: The previous term, the Court had dramatically enlarged the activities that were considered to be in or to affect interstate commerce. It had also altered its settled jurisprudence in the area of substantive due process, the doctrine dealing with rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. The changes meant that many New Deal programs that the Court would previously have struck down as unconstitutional would now be found constitutional.
   Numerous challenges to the law were filed in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, and injunctions were issued on the grounds that the law was an unconstitutional regulation of an activity not connected to interstate commerce. The Supreme Court took the case without waiting for an appeal to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
   Section::::Black Monday.:Humphrey's Executor v. United States.
   According to Ocasio-Cortez's Chief of Staff, the Green New Deal was not originally related to climate at all.
  
  On March 26, in what Democrats called a "stunt," Republicans called for an early vote on the resolution without allowing discussion or expert testimony. In protest, 42 Democrats and one Independent who caucuses with Democrats voted "present" resulting in a 57–0 defeat on the Senate floor. Three Democrats and one Independent who caucuses with Democrats voted against the bill, while the other votes were along party lines.
   The first major test of New Deal legislation came in "Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan", announced January 7, 1935. Contested in this case was the National Industrial Recovery Act, Section 9(c), in which Congress had delegated to the President authority "to prohibit the transportation in interstate and foreign commerce of petroleum ... produced or withdrawn from storage in excess of the amount permitted ... by any State law". The NIRA passed in June 1933, and Roosevelt moved quickly to file executive orders to regulate the oil industry. Two small, independent oil producers, Panama Refining Co. and Amazon Petroleum Co. filed suit seeking an injunction to halt enforcement, arguing that the law exceeded Congress's interstate commerce power and improperly delegated authority to the President.
   In contrast, Representative Ro Khanna thought that creating a Select Committee specifically dedicated to a Green New Deal would be a "very commonsense idea", based on the recent example of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming (2007–2011), which had proven effective in developing a 2009 bill for cap-and-trade legislation.
  
  Proposals for the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis did not contain “Green New Deal" language and lacked the powers desired by Green New Deal proponents, such as the ability to subpoena documents or depose witnesses.
  
  Representative Kathy Castor of Florida was appointed to chair the committee.
   Although the non-specific nature of current GND proposals has become a concern for some Greens, one writer from the Columbia University Earth Institute views the lack of specificity as a strength, noting that: "FDR’s New Deal was a series of improvisations in response to specific problems that were stalling economic development. There was no master plan, many ideas failed, and some were ended after a period of experimentation. But some, like social security and the Security and Exchange Commission’s regulation of the stock market, became permanent American institutions."
   This would be the Democrats greatest triumph in history and would mark the high-water mark of their national power. In spite of concerted and sometimes vicious attacks from the Republicans, the New Deal and the hope that it provided, had been decisively and overwhelmingly ratified by the working class, poor, elderly, blacks, and middle class across the nation.
  
  Section::::6th term.
   Constitutional challenges to the New Deal
  
  The New Deal often encountered heavy criticism, and had many constitutional challenges.
   Section::::Black Monday.:Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States.
  
  The final blow for the President on Black Monday fell with the reading of "Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States", which revisited the National Industrial Recovery Act, invalidating the NIRA in its entirety.
   "Nebbia" also holds a particular significance: it was the one case in which the Court abandoned its jurisprudential distinction between the "public" and "private" spheres of economic activity, an essential distinction in the court's analysis of state police power. The effect of this decision radiated outward, affecting other doctrinal methods of analysis in wage regulation, labor, and the power of the U.S. Congress to regulate commerce.
   The first of three cases on Black Monday read out was "Humphrey's Executor v. United States". After taking office, President Roosevelt came to believe that William Humphrey, a Republican appointed to a six-year term on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 1931, was at odds with the administration's New Deal initiatives. Writing to request Humphrey's resignation from the FTC in August 1933, Roosevelt openly admitted his reason for seeking his removal: "I did not feel that your mind and my mind go along together." This proved to be a blunder on Roosevelt's part. When Humphrey could not be persuaded to resign, Roosevelt dismissed him from office on October 7.
   Incoming House committee chairs Frank Pallone and Peter DeFazio indicated a preference for handling these matters in the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. (Writing in "Gentleman's Quarterly", Jay Willis responded that despite the best efforts of Pallone and De Fazio over many years, "the planet's prognosis has failed to improve," providing "pretty compelling evidence that it is time for legislators to consider taking a different approach.")
   With several cases laying forth the criteria necessary to respect the due process and property rights of individuals, and statements of what constituted an appropriate delegation of legislative powers to the President, Congress quickly revised the Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA). However, New Deal supporters still wondered how the AAA would fare against Chief Justice Hughes's restrictive view of the Commerce Clause from the "Schechter" decision.
   A different source of conservative Democratic dissent against the New Deal came from a group of journalists who considered themselves classical liberals and Democrats of the old school, and were opposed to big government programs on principle; these included Albert Jay Nock and John T. Flynn, whose views later became influential in the libertarian movement.
   In the 116th United States Congress, it is a pair of resolutions, House Resolution 109 and S. Res. 59, sponsored by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA). On March 25, 2019, Markey's resolution failed to advance in the U.S. Senate in a margin of 0-57, with most Senate Democrats voting "present" in protest of an early vote called by Republicans.
  
  Section::::History.
  
  Throughout the 1970s and 1990s an economic policy to move the United States economy away from nonrenewable energy was developed by multiple activists.
   Next announced was "Louisville Joint Stock Land Bank v. Radford". The 1934 Frazier-Lemke Farm Bankruptcy Act was designed to give aid to debt-ridden farmers, allowing them to reacquire farms they had lost from foreclosure, or to petition the Bankruptcy Court within their district to suspend foreclosure proceedings. The legislation's ultimate goal was to help those farmers scale down their mortgages.
   On May 25, 1936, the Supreme Court ruled the 1934 Municipal Bankruptcy Act (also known as the Sumners-Wilcox Bill) was unconstitutional in a 5-4 decision. The law amended the Federal Bankruptcy Act and permitted any municipality or other political subdivision of any state to obtain a voluntary readjustment of its debts through proceedings in Federal Court. Texas' Cameron County Water Improvement Dist. No. 1, which claimed to be insolvent and unable to meets its debts in the long run, petitioned the local Federal District Court for readjustments granted under the Municipal Bankruptcy Act. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, which found that the law violated Tenth Amendment rights of state sovereignty.
   The decision in the "Parrish" case received the most attention, and later became an integral part of the "switch in time" narrative of conventional history. In the case, the court divided along the same lines it had in the "Tipaldo" case, only this time around Roberts voted to overrule the "Adkins" precedent as the case brief specifically asked the court to reconsider its prior decision. Further, the decision worked to hinder Roosevelt's push for the court reform bill, further reducing what little public support there was for change in the Supreme Court.
   In response to the March on Washington Movement led by A. Philip Randolph, Roosevelt promulgated Executive Order 8802 in June 1941, which established the President's Committee on Fair Employment Practices (FEPC) "to receive and investigate complaints of discrimination" so that "there shall be no discrimination in the employment of workers in defense industries or government because of race, creed, color, or national origin".
  
  Section::::World War II and full employment.:Growing equality of income.
   On May 18, 1936, the Supreme Court ruled the act unconstitutional by a 5-4 margin. Associate Justice Sutherland read the "Carter v. Carter Coal Company" opinion, striking down the coal act in its entirety, citing the "Schechter" decision. Most surprising in the opinion was reliance on 19th-century cases legal scholars had thought long repudiated: "Kidd v. Pearson" and "United States v. E. C. Knight Co."
  
  Section::::Ashton v. Cameron County Water Improvement Dist. No. 1.
   Compounding matters, Roosevelt's congenial Solicitor General, James Crawford Biggs (a patronage appointment chosen by Cummings), proved to be an ineffective advocate for the legislative initiatives of the New Deal. While Biggs resigned in early 1935, his successor Stanley Forman Reed proved to be little better.
   Although the decision emasculated NIRA, it had little practical impact, as Congress was unlikely to have reauthorized the Act in any case.
  
  Section::::Criticism.
   Associate Justice Roberts again delivered the opinion of a divided court, agreeing with those challenging the tax. Regarding agriculture as an essentially local activity, the court invalidated the AAA as a violation of the powers reserved to the states under the Tenth Amendment. The court also used the occasion to settle a dispute over the General Welfare Clause stemming back to the administration of George Washington, holding Congress possessed a power to tax and spend for the general welfare.
  
  Section::::Carter v. Carter Coal Co..
   The Farm Tenancy Act in 1937 was the last major New Deal legislation that concerned farming. In turn, it created the Farm Security Administration (FSA), which replaced the Resettlement Administration.
  