As it turns out, firing the head of the Office of Special Counsel was illegal.

[DonGlock26]

Congress can’t design a law that is repugnant to the Constitution

Are 2 section 1 states clearly who and who alone has executive power. Congress can’t give some of it to someone else

That's the whole case in a nutshell. The SCOTUS will have to smack Berman's garbage ruling down.

 

[struth]

That's the whole case in a nutshell. The SCOTUS will have to smack Berman's garbage ruling down.

Yes that’s what the case comes down to. For years Congress and with the permission of the executive has seceded vast amounts of power to unelected civil servants, who in their position can undermine the will of rhe people in our republic

I can certainly understand the need or desire to have some sort of independent overseer of executive offices, but that’s why our constitution gave oversight authority to Congress, that’s their job

 

[berg80]

Is the Left over using the words "nazi" and "dictatorship"?

If you read the book "How Democracies Die" you will see unmistakable parallels between the rise of past authoritarian governments around the world and what the trump admin is doing. It can not be denied but any reasonable observer of the last 5 weeks that trump is trying to concentrate unassailable power to the prez in ways no other prez ever has.

 

[berg80]

That's the whole case in a nutshell. The SCOTUS will have to smack Berman's garbage ruling down.

She ruled according to the law as it was written was intended.

 

[pknopp]

Yes that’s what the case comes down to. For years Congress and with the permission of the executive has seceded vast amounts of power to unelected civil servants, who in their position can undermine the will of rhe people in our republic

I can certainly understand the need or desire to have some sort of independent overseer of executive offices, but that’s why our constitution gave oversight authority to Congress, that’s their job

And this is how they addressed it. Is it cowardly? Yes. Was it done to avoid responsibility come election time? Yes, but it was how they chose to address it.

To change it, Congress has to.

 

[Polishprince]

If you read the book "How Democracies Die" you will see unmistakable parallels between the rise of past authoritarian governments around the world and what the trump admin is doing. It can not be denied but any reasonable observer of the last 5 weeks that trump is trying to concentrate unassailable power to the prez in ways no other prez ever has.

Just because an Ignoramus Dipshit wrote a book doesn't mean he knows feces from Shinola.

Turning over power to unelected bureaucrats that are answerable to no one, like this "special " counsel is the problem.

 

[struth]

And this is how they addressed it. Is it cowardly? Yes. Was it done to avoid responsibility come election time? Yes, but it was how they chose to address it.

To change it, Congress has to.

It’s not that it’s cowardly it appears to run amok of the constitution

Where does the constitution allow Congress to give executive power to unelected officials and away from the president?

 

[Polishprince]

And this is how they addressed it. Is it cowardly? Yes. Was it done to avoid responsibility come election time? Yes, but it was how they chose to address it.

To change it, Congress has to.

No they don't. Congress isn't allowed to pass unconstitutional laws and if they do, they are not real laws.

If Congress wanted to establish a truly independent "special counsel" like this dipshit judge said they did, they would need to pass a Constitutional Amendment.

 

[pknopp]

It’s not that it’s cowardly it appears to run amok of the constitution

You note yourself it does not. The Constitution does not specify how it must be addressed.

Where does the constitution allow Congress to give executive power to unelected officials and away from the president?

No one has executive power here. You make something up that doesn't exist and think it needs replied to. It does not.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A federal judge ruled Saturday that President Donald Trump’s firing of a federal workforce watchdog was illegal — teeing up a Supreme Court showdown over the president’s claim to nearly absolute control of the executive branch.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson concluded that Hampton Dellinger — confirmed last year as head of the Office of Special Counsel — may continue to serve his five-year term despite Trump’s effort to remove him from the post via a brusque email last month.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/01/judge-rules-trumps-firing-of-federal-workforce-watchdog-was-illegal-00206877

Let's look a this from the standpoint of what is best for the country.

Jackson ruled that Dellinger’s duties, which include holding executive branch officials accountable for ethics breaches and fielding whistleblower complaints, were meant to be independent from the president, making the position a rare exception to the president’s generally vast domain over the executive branch.

Doesn't it make sense for someone in a position of "holding executive branch officials accountable for ethics breaches and fielding whistleblower complaints" should only be able to be removed for cause. I mean, what's the point of having a gatekeeper in charge of preventing unethical behavior on the part of the executive branch if he or she can be fired for doing their job?

The same question can be asked of DoJ officials and FBI agents. Doing your job, no matter who it relates to, should never result in being fired. The subject of investigations should not have the power to fire the investigators. Surely we can agree on that.

Like the Board of "Education" the Office of Special Council is another Progressive "gift" from Jimmy Carter that needs to be eliminated

Are there similar "independent" offices for the Judiciary or Congress?

 

[berg80]

Just because an Ignoramus Dipshit wrote a book doesn't mean he knows feces from Shinola.

Actually, there are two authors. Both experts in the rise of autocracies around the world. Mostly, they recite the ways in which those autocratic leaders came to power. It's like reading trump's playbook.

 

[berg80]

No they don't. Congress isn't allowed to pass unconstitutional laws and if they do, they are not real laws.

If Congress wanted to establish a truly independent "special counsel" like this dipshit judge said they did, they would need to pass a Constitutional Amendment.

Don't be absurd. You are making the fallacious assumption the Constitution gave the executive branch unchecked power. The opposite is true.

 

[Polishprince]

Don't be absurd. You are making the fallacious assumption the Constitution gave the executive branch unchecked power. The opposite is true.

Who says that the executive branch has "unchecked" power? Not me. Congress can certainly investigate and even impeach the President. But the President is the head of the executive branch and the other people in the branch are just his deputies that report to him.

 

[struth]

You note yourself it does not. The Constitution does not specify how it must be addressed.



No one has executive power here. You make something up that doesn't exist and think it needs replied to. It does not.

Yes it does, art 2 section 1 is clear

Of course the office of the special counsel does, they are enforcing federal law, the court in its opinion even acknowledges that but says essentially, well it’s not broad executive power.

 

[berg80]

But the President is the head of the executive branch and the other people in the branch are just his deputies that report to him.

Under most circumstances that's true. But Congress explicitly meant for Dellinger's position to only be exposed to termination for justified cause, not arbitrary removal for political purposes.

 

[Polishprince]

Under most circumstances that's true. But Congress explicitly meant for Dellinger's position to only be exposed to termination for justified cause, not arbitrary removal for political purposes.

The "justified" cause here is that the investigation is over and his services are no longer needed.

Nothing "political" about it.

I suppose if the fellow had "civil service" status, they could transfer him to another executive branch duty like mowing the lawn at the WH.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson Rules the Bureaucracy Controls the Executive Branch, Not the President​

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson Rules the Bureaucracy Controls the Executive Branch, Not the President - The Last Refuge
March 2, 2025 | Sundance |
Not unexpectedly, U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson has ruled that unelected bureaucrat, Hampton Dellinger, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel head has more unilateral power within the executive branch of government than President Donald Trump. [RULING pdf HERE]



This ruling stems from the same mindset as former AG Bill Barr, former FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy AG Sally Yates, former IC Inspector General Michael Atkinson, and the entire organization of professional Lawfare activists that includes Mary McCord, Andrew Weissmann and Norm Eisen. The collective belief is that in the modern “continuity of government” framework, the bureaucracy of government controls things, not the elected and plenary President.

Basic constitutional civics has been destroyed in the modern era by progressive advocacy saying the executive branch is an omnipotent organism that is not controlled by the duly elected President of the United States. Current Lawfare activists and activist judges seek to retain this bastardized view of constitutional government.

Let us hope the Supreme Court finally puts an end to decades of this ridiculous nonsense. The earlier ruling in the Presidential Immunity decision indicates SCOTUS is positioned to do exactly that."


The Left's favorite Obama appointed judge comes through for the Deep State again.

Trump and his supporters don’t care about what’s illegal, of course.

Indeed, Trump is a criminal and convicted felon who has contempt for the rule of law.

 

[DonGlock26]

Trump and his supporters don’t care about what’s illegal, of course.

Indeed, Trump is a criminal and convicted felon who has contempt for the rule of law.

Who controls the executive branch? The president or congress?

 

[DonGlock26]

Less than an hour after Jackson ruled, the Justice Department appealed her decision to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/01/judge-rules-trumps-firing-of-federal-workforce-watchdog-was-illegal-00206877

 

[berg80]

The "justified" cause here is that the investigation is over and his services are no longer needed.

You've misconstrued what he does because of his title.