Time to fire the Deepstate

[Swordsmyth]

RE: the immunity decision

Yesterday, in a stunning opinion that destabilized the Lawfare ideologues, the Supreme Court affirmed the Unitary Executive principle around the constitution.

The 6-3 opinion held that the President is “a person alone who comprises a branch of government.” This is important to understand. The Executive Branch is the President.

As noted by reader Alex1689: […] Read the SCOTUS opinion, not from a point of view of apprehension about President Trump (he’ll be fine), but from the point of view of what does this allow him to do in his second term, and what straightjackets does it remove that were a threat during his first term?

To start, the court wrote about powers that carry with them core, absolute immunity, the exercise of which cannot come under question in any forum. It specifically identified:

Pardons

Recognition of foreign governments

Removal of executive branch officials.

If it can’t be questioned . . . It also cannot be the grounds for impeachment, can it?

Let’s repeat: If it’s a core power, the exercise of the core power cannot be grounds for impeachment (*except if done in connection with taking a bribe).

In his first term, there was the threat that if President Trump fired . . .

Rosenstein
Barr
Fauci

That he would be prosecuted for obstruction of justice or impeached.

That threat is forever off the table now.

He can fire anyone he likes in the executive branch. The straightjacket is gone.

On that point, further, the majority opinion uses strong language consistent with the Unitary Executive theory of the Constitution. The President is “a person alone who comprises a branch of government.”

While there are areas of shared constitutional responsibility, the core powers of the Executive Branch, including personnel, are the President’s alone.

Schedule F

Boom.

While impeachment is a political process within the Legislative Branch, and the Supreme Court is extremely hesitant to overstep their role therein, they did put this sentiment clearly into the opinion about immunity: …“The President is not above the law. But Congress may not criminalize the President’s conduct in carrying out the responsibilities of the Executive Branch under the Constitution.”…

Congress may not criminalize the conduct of the President simply for carrying out his core executive branch duties. Removal of Executive Branch officials is a core duty, an official act, carrying absolute immunity.

That newly affirmed reality is exactly why Andrew Weissmann and the Lawfare crowd are very alarmed.

More at: https://theconservativetreehouse.co...cision-the-president-is-the-executive-branch/

 

[69360]

SCOTUS didn't break any new ground, they just confirmed the way things have always been.

 

[Swordsmyth]

SCOTUS didn't break any new ground, they just confirmed the way things have always been.

Utter nonsense.

A myriad of laws have been passed to prevent presidents from firing government workers and the like.
The bureaucracy has been turned into an unelected independent branch of government known as the deepstate.
SCOTUS just got rid of all of that.
The Executive branch is an extension of the President and he has total power over it.

Tell your friends to start packing.

 

[acptulsa]

At least it removes an excuse Trump's fans have relied on heavily. Can't use that one in the second term.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Interestingly enough, the Biden cabal has already been able to do whatever they want during his term, with no consequences or hindrances at all...

 

[Snowball]

I agree with the ruling entirely, and there is no doubt Trump cannot be victimized for official duties any longer.

The problem is, rather, WHY did he HIRE the Deep State to begin with? That's what I'm concerned about.
Just like he's already said Nikki Haley will be in his adminstration.

 

[CaptUSA]

The problem is, rather, WHY did he HIRE the Deep State to begin with? That's what I'm concerned about.
Just like he's already said Nikki Haley will be in his adminstration.

Come on, man... Just think of how many more deep staters he can fire after he hires them!! 4D chessmate!

 

[jmdrake]

SCOTUS didn't break any new ground, they just confirmed the way things have always been.

True. Obama murdered (excuse me "extrajudicially killed") Anwar Al Awlawki and there were no repercussions and their won't be.

Utter nonsense.

A myriad of laws have been passed to prevent presidents from firing government workers and the like.
The bureaucracy has been turned into an unelected independent branch of government known as the deepstate.
SCOTUS just got rid of all of that.
The Executive branch is an extension of the President and he has total power over it.

Tell your friends to start packing.

:rolleyes Did you actually read the opinion? Did you understand the opinion?

From the opinion.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/603/23-939/#tab-opinion-4913924

The District Court denied the motion to dismiss, holding that “former Presidents do not possess absolute federal criminal immunity for any acts committed while in office.” 2023 WL 8359833, *15 (DC, Dec. 1, 2023). The District Court recognized that the President is immune from damages liability in civil cases, to protect against the chilling effect such exposure might have on the carrying out of his responsibilities. See Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731, 749–756 (1982). But it reasoned that “the possibility of vexatious post-Presidency litigation is much reduced in the criminal context” in light of “[t]he robust procedural safeguards attendant to federal criminal prosecutions.” 2023 WL 8359833, *9–*10. The District Court declined to decide whether the indicted conduct involved official acts. See id., at *15.

. . .
We granted certiorari to consider the following question: “Whether and if so to what extent does a former President enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.” 601 U. S. ___ (2024).
. . .
If the President claims authority to act but in fact exercises mere “individual will” and “authority without law,” the courts may say so. Youngstown, 343 U. S., at 655 (Jackson, J., concurring). In Youngstown, for instance, we held that President Truman exceeded his constitutional authority when he seized most of the Nation’s steel mills. See id., at 582–589 (majority opinion). But once it is determined that the President acted within the scope of his exclusive authority, his discretion in exercising such authority cannot be subject to further judicial examination.​

This case was never about the unitary executive and it recognizes there are limits to presidential power. The case was about what criminal liability a former president may have for official acts. Presidents had already been granted civil immunity for official acts.

As for the "deep state" the recent case overturning "Chevron Deference" is much more of a victory against that. Chevron Deference is the idea that if part of a federal law if vague the Courts should "defer" to the expertise of the administrative agency.

See https://federalnewsnetwork.com/mana...n-overturning-chevron-deference-means-to-you/

 

[Snowball]

Come on, man... Just think of how many more deep staters he can fire after he hires them!! 4D chessmate!

According to some, none of these civilian leaders in "the West" have any real power. They learn quick they can't upset the apple cart, or they are dealt with.

 

[TheCount]

The fact that this person thinks that the supreme court can decide what is or is not grounds for impeachment really says everything that there is to say

 

[unknown]

Mr. Izrael/Mr. Police State, is going to get rid of the Deep State...