Comments in Response to the Rule Proposed by the Consumer Product Safety Commission: Revisions to Safety Standards for Sling Carriers

COMMENTS SUMMARY

CPSC’s refusal to provide free and open access to the safety standards (or revisions thereto) that it proposes drastically undermines the public’s ability to participate meaningfully in notice-and-comment rulemaking. Considering the constraints imposed by CPSC’s secret lawmaking, NCLA confines its commentary to procedural objections.

Due process requires that the government, at a minimum, adequately inform the public of its legal obligations before proceeding to hold the public accountable for proscribed conduct. Forcing the public to pay for access to the law offends our constitutional structure, due process, and the First Amendment. The Proposed Rule continues an odious trend of CPSC’s incorporating private standards into the law only by reference, thereby hiding the law behind a paywall. The Proposed Rule is therefore unconstitutional and must not be enacted as proposed.