‘Do you understand?’: Lauren Boebert just got laughed at by the head of the EPA, instead of the whole internet for a change

MAGA embarrassment Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) tried to seem like the smartest kid in class at a recent House Oversight Committee hearing. Instead, Boebert got schooled by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA’s) Michael Regan, and Boebert’s committee colleague Dan Goldman, a New York Democrat. Regan couldn’t help but laugh at Boebert’s line of questioning.

Regan was before the committee on July 10, 2024, to answer questions “on the Biden administration’s push of excessive environmental regulations and abuse of environmental protection authorities,” the panel said. At one point, Boebert, a Colorado Republican, asked Regan the following,

I’m asking about the EPA and I’m asking about your rogue bureaucrats that have enacted these unconstitutional regulations. Are you going to repeal them? Are you going to continue to implement them or are you going to stop all together?”

via Newsweek

Boebert’s question referred to the Supreme Court’s recent overturning of the so-called Chevron deference. In effect, the court’s controversial decision made it easier to challenge Federal agency rules and regulations in court. However, it said nothing about unconstitutional regulations or the need to repeal any at the EPA or any other agency, as Boebert suggested.

Dumbfounded, Regan could only respond: “Do you understand the ruling?” and Boebert responded, “Do you understand the ruling of the Supreme Court?” Regan said, “I do, and so your question is ill-formed.” Finally, he said no, the EPA would not repeal any existing regulations, because that’s not what the Supreme Court’s ruling was about. He then laughed while Boebert pressed the matter.

Dan Goldman was the grown up in the room

Later in the hearing, New York Democrat Dan Goldman had to clarify for Lauren Boebert that Regan was correct. Goldman explained that the Loper Bright ruling overturning the Chevron deference said “the courts should not defer to agency rulemaking if a statute is ambiguous. Instead, the courts get to determine what the statute means. That would not require any regulations to be reversed or overturned.”

Clearly, Boebert needs to study up before the next hearing, as some social media comments on the cringe exchange pointed out, including: “Stay in school, people,” “Why Colorado? Why??,” “She is dumber than a box of Boeberts,” and “Boebert getting smacked down by Dan Goldman made my day! 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥”