President Donald Trump Ministry of Justice He wants to undo the significant case of the Supreme Court in an effort to provide the president with greater control over independent three -letter agencies.
In a move that could be easier for Trump to release officers who refuse to implement his policies, the performance of the American lawyer sent a letter to Democratic Senator Illinois Dick Durbin on Wednesday, informing him of the Ministry of Justice’s plans to request the Supreme Court to overturn the key precedent limiting the President’s power of removal independent agency members.
The letter, written by the Attorney General, Sarah Harris, says the impression has determined “that certain provisions on removal are the cause” applied to certain members of the administrative agency unconstitutional and the department “will no longer defend its constitutionality”.
Trump’s Ministry of Justice Distribution of Charges Against Mayor Nyc Mayor Eric Adams Sparks Sparks
Humphrey’s Executer against the United States, the subject is 1935 The case of the Supreme Court This narrowed the Constitutional Power of the President to remove the executive agent.
Earlier this month, former NLRB member sued President Donald Trump for termination, claiming that the Federal Law protects it from arbitrarily rejected. (Evan Vucci/AP)
Harris cited the previous case, Myers against the United States, who believed the Constitution approved the President the only authority to remove officials of the Executive Branch.
“The exception recognized in Humphrey’s executors does not correspond to the main officers who run the mentioned regulatory commission,” Harris wrote in the letter.
“To the extent that Humphrey’s executor requires the department, intends to invite the Supreme Court to overcome the decision, which prevents the President from adequately supervised by the main officials in the executive government who has made laws on behalf of the President and has already been strongly eroded by the recent decisions of the Supreme Court.” , Harris continued.
Durbin called the letter “by a striking turn of the long -standing position of the Ministry of Justice under Republican and democratic presidents,” in a statement to Fox News Digital. He added that the request “is not surprising from an administration that only looks after the rich special interests – not the American people.”
However, conservative legal theorists supported Trump’s administration move, claiming that the overturning of Humphrey’s executor would bring the federal government closer to the original intention of the Framer Constitution. Trump significantly represented his presidential campaign against former President Joe Biden as a competition between a “deep state” and democracy, saying at the time: “Either we have a deep state or we have a democracy. We will have one or the rest.
“The Congress brings laws, the president’s duty is to carry out and implement these laws according to unitar executive theory,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal associate at the Heritage Foundation, for Fox News Digital. “This means that he is president, since he is the head ExecutiveIt has complete control over the executive power, and this includes the employment and cracking of all in the executive government, especially, and most importantly, the heads of all different offices and departments within the executive. “
He sent an act of the US lawyer on Wednesday at Illinois to Democratic Senator Dick Durbin, informing him about the plans of the Ministry of Justice to ask the Supreme Court to cancel a key precedent who limits the president’s authority to remove independent agency members. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
Von Spakovsky says that the exception that the court has engraved in Humphrey’s executors “does not apply to these federal agencies”. In his letter, Harris specifically mentioned the Federal Commission for Trade (FTC), the National Committee on Working Relations (NLRB) and the Consumer Products’ Security Commission (CPSC).
Earlier this month, former NLRB member Sued Trump During its breaks, claiming that the Federal Law protects it from arbitrarily rejected. Trump’s administration has also become the target of various other lawsuits involving the release of federal employees.
“My understanding of what is happening with Trump’s daily order is to itch them to be understood to a higher level of federal court, including the Supreme Court, to press this kind of question,” Ronald Pestritto, Dean’s graduate and professor at Hillsdale College, said, said for Fox News Digital.
Pestritto says that some of the administration actions “are contrary to the existing law on civil service, for example, the existing protection against the removal of the NLRB commissioner”.
“And so the real story of the ribbon will be when these initial judgments complain of the appeal ladder and eventually to the Supreme Court, which certainly has many courts that I think they understand Article II of the Constitution properly and can be open to a re -examination of Humphrey’s,” he said Pestritto. (Photo Olivier DoulieryAfp via Getty Images)
“And so, obviously, they know that they will lose a lot at the lower level of the court. And they want to push them to the Supreme Court, because they think they could review it,” Pestritto said.
Von Spakovsky stated that the independent agencies were “imperceptible” as a result of Humphrey’s executor, saying that “they make them responsible voters, bringing them back to where they belong, which is under the power of the president.”
Click here to get the Fox News app
Trump’s lawyers are likely to lose in the lower court, says Pestritto, where he expects judges to apply a precedent of the Supreme Court in their own decisions. But even so, Trump’s administration can complain more and more to try to re -examine the Supreme Court, where Humphrey’s executor could be canceled.
“[Democrats] They will win the bans very often, first of all, because they know that it is easy to judge for judges of cute districts. And number two, district judges will basically pass the existing precedent of the Supreme Court, “Pestritto said.” And so the real story of the ribbon will be when these initial verdicts complain of the appellant’s ladder and finally to the top to the top of the court, which certainly has many judgments that I think they understand the article II of the Constitution properly and may be open to re -examining the Humphrey. “
