Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
President Donald Trump’s Department of Justice He is trying to revoke a historical case of the Supreme Court in an effort to give the President greater control over three -letter independent agencies.
In a movement that could allow Trump to say more easily the officials who refuse to implement their policies, the United States interim at the United States sent a letter to Illinois Democratic Senator Dick Durbin on Wednesday, notifying him about the plans of the department of Justice to ask the Supreme Court to turn. A key precedent that limits the president’s power to eliminate the members of the Independent Agency.
The letter, written by the Attorney General Sarah Harris, says that the Department of Justice has determined “that certain provisions of cause of cause” that apply to certain members of the administrative agency are unconstitutional, and the department “would no longer defend its constitutionality “.
The Albacea of Humphrey v. United States, the case in question, is a 1935 Case of the Supreme Court That reduced the constitutional power of the president to eliminate the agents from the executive branch.
Earlier this month, a former NLRB member demanded President Donald Trump for his termination, arguing that the Federal Law protects her from being arbitrarily dismissed. (EVAN VUCCI/AP)
Harris cited a previous case, Myers v. United States, which argued that the Constitution granted the president of the President to eliminate officials from the Executive Branch.
“The exception recognized in the Albacea of Humphrey does not conform to the main officers who direct the regulatory commissions mentioned above,” Harris wrote in the letter.
“To the extent that the Albacea of Humphrey requires otherwise, the department intends to urge the Supreme Court to cancel that decision, which prevents the President from adequately supervising the main officials in the Executive Power that execute the laws On behalf of the president, and that has already been severely eroded by the recent decisions of the Supreme Court, “Harris continued.
Durbin described the letter as “surprising reversal of the long -standing position of the Department of Justice under Republican and Democratic Presidents,” in a statement to Fox News Digital. He added that the request “is not surprising of an administration that only seeks special interests, not the American people.”
However, conservative legal theorists supported the Trump administration movement, arguing that annuling Humphrey’s executor would bring the federal government closer to the original intention of the constitution’s editors. Trump remarkably represented his presidential campaign against former President Joe Biden as a contest between the “deep state” and democracy, saying at that time: “or we have a deep state or we have a democracy. We will have one or the other. And We are right at the turning point. “
“The Congress makes the laws, it is the duty of the president to carry out and enforce those laws under the unitary executive theory,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal member of the Heritage Foundation, Fox News Digital. “That means that the president, since he is the head of The executive branchHe has complete control over the executive branch, and that includes the hiring and dismissal of all in the executive branch, most importantly, and most importantly, the chiefs of all the different offices and departments within the executive branch. “
The Attorney General of the United States interim sent a letter to the Democratic Senator of Illinois Dick Durbin, notifying him about the plans of the Justice Department to ask the Supreme Court to annul a key precedent that limits the president’s power to eliminate the members of the independent agency. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
Von Spakovsky says that the exception forged by the court in the Albacea of Humphrey “does not apply to these federal agencies.” In his letter, Harris specifically mentioned the Federal Commerce Commission (FTC), the National Board of Labor Relations (NLRB) and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).
Earlier this month, a former NLRB member He sued Trump During its termination, arguing that the federal law protects it from being arbitrarily fired. The Trump administration has also become the objective of several other demands that involve federal layoffs of employees.
“My opinion about what is happening with Trump’s agenda at this time is that they are eager to reach the higher level of the Federal Court, including the Supreme Court, to press this type of question,” Ronald Fish, Graduated Dean and Professor and Professor Policy at Hillsdale College, he told Fox News Digital.
Pestritto says that some of the actions of the administration “contradict the existing civil service law, existing protections, for example, against the elimination of NLRB commissioners.”
“And so, the true story of the tape will be when these initial decisions are appealed by the appeal scale and, ultimately, to the Supreme Court, which certainly has many judges that I think they understand article II of the Constitution correctly And they can be open to a reconsideration of Humphrey, “said Pestritto. (Photo by Olivier Doulieryafp through Getty Images)
“And so, clearly, they know that they will lose a lot of that at the level of the lower court. And they want to push them to the Supreme Court, because they believe they could obtain a reconsideration,” said Fish.
Von Spakovsky declared that independent agencies are “inexplicable” as a result of the Albacea of Humphrey, saying that “they make them responsible to the voters when they replace them where they belong, which is under the author’s authority.”
Click here to get the Fox News application
It is likely that Trump’s lawyers will lose in the lower court, says Pestritto, where he expects the judges to apply the precedent of the Supreme Court in their own decisions. But even so, the Trump administration can appeal more and more to try a review of the Supreme Court, where Humphrey’s executor could be revoked.
“(The Democrats) will gain very often precautionary measures, first, because they know that it is easy to judge the store for sympathized district judges. And the number two, the district judges are basically going to the precedent of the existing Supreme Court, “said Pestritto.” And so, the real story of the tape will be when these initial decisions are appealed by the appeal and final Humphrey reconsideration. “
