Politics TRUMP'S APPOINTMENT OF WHITAKER IS ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL

[Chris Craig]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ny...ey-general-sessions-unconstitutional.amp.html

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

He was Session's Chief of Staff.
This is a temporary position.

 

[Chris Craig]

He was Session's Chief of Staff.
This is a temporary position.

He cannot be the attorney general or even acting attorney general because he was not approved for it by the senate and house, as is listed in the constitution as to checks and balances to stop the abuse of power from the executive branch.

 

[Chris Craig]

Anything Whitaker does under the capacity of attorney general is invalid

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

He cannot be the attorney general or even acting attorney general because he was not approved for it by the senate and house, as is listed in the constitution as to checks and balances to stop the abuse of power from the executive branch.

There is no confirmation process for interim positions such as acting AG, is there?

 

[Chris Craig]

There is no confirmation process for interim positions such as acting AG, is there?

All appointments

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

He cannot be the attorney general or even acting attorney general because he was not approved for it by the senate and house, as is listed in the constitution as to checks and balances to stop the abuse of power from the executive branch.

Who should be fulfilling the role of the attorney general in the interim, prior to the appointment/confirmation of a replacement?

 

[Chris Craig]

Who should be fulfilling the role of the attorney general in the interim, prior to the appointment/confirmation of a replacement?

Rosenstein by law

It must be someone already affirmed by the congress for their current position

 

[andalusian]

Who should be fulfilling the role of the attorney general in the interim, prior to the appointment/confirmation of a replacement?

Hillary Clinton. (this is going to be fun).

 

[PtldPlatypus]

From the comments:

The NLRB case the Supreme Court decided last year did not settle the issue of whether all principal officers must be confirmed by the Senate. In fact, the majority affirmed that interim, or acting appointments - such as in the case of death or resignation - may be made. Instead, they simply ruled that the statute which allows non-confirmed acting appointments also bars interim appointments of people who are ALSO nominated for Senate confirmation. . ​

 

[Chris Craig]

From the comments:

The NLRB case the Supreme Court decided last year did not settle the issue of whether all principal officers must be confirmed by the Senate. In fact, the majority affirmed that interim, or acting appointments - such as in the case of death or resignation - may be made. Instead, they simply ruled that the statute which allows non-confirmed acting appointments also bars interim appointments of people who are ALSO nominated for Senate confirmation. . ​

The SC didn't settle the issue therfore the constitution rules

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The SC didn't settle the issue therfore the constitution rules

The Constitution doesn't say anything about interim appointments, and the SC did. Can you help me understand how the part I quoted doesn't apply to the current situation?

 

[Chris Craig]

The Constitution doesn't say anything about interim appointments, and the SC did. Can you help me understand how the part I quoted doesn't apply to the current situation?

and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for

 

[PtldPlatypus]

and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for

Again, a statute exists--and has already come before the court--that provides for interim appointments. The Supreme Court has ruled that interim appointments are permissible as long as the interim appointee is not also being submitted for confirmation for permanent appointment.

If the people whose job it is to interpret the Constitution have decided that interim appointments are legal and constitutional, who are we to say otherwise?

 

[Chris Craig]

The Constitution doesn't say anything about interim appointments, and the SC did. Can you help me understand how the part I quoted doesn't apply to the current situation?

The vacancy can be filled during the recess of congress, but it must be filled by a person such as Rosenstein who has already been approved by congress for his current position.

 

[Further]

It’s a really interesting question and I’m not sure which view is correct. Sounds from my reading that it Is unconstitutional but I’ve now heard several constitutional lawyers debate this issue without a clear consensus.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The vacancy can be filled during the recess of congress, but it must be filled by a person such as Rosenstein who has already been approved by congress for his current position.

Is that what the statute referenced in the NLRB case says?

 

[Chris Craig]

Is that what the statute referenced in the NLRB case says?

It doesn't say just that vancancies can be filled during interim. They never settled that part. The constitution says it must be a person qualified( approved by congress already for their current position)

 

[Chris Craig]

I guess we know why Trump did it now. Trying to use loopholes

 

[PtldPlatypus]

It doesn't say just that vancancies can be filled during interim. They never settled that part. The constitution says it must be a person qualified( approved by congress already for their current position)

The Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 says pretty clearly that if a vacancy arises in a PAS office... notwithstanding paragraph (1), [the section that would have Rosenstein fill the role] the President “may direct” a person already serving in another PAS office, or a senior employee in the relevant agency, to serve in an acting capacity instead.

The decision in the NLRB case related to Lafe Solomon who was nominated for confirmation, whose nomination was then rescinded, but remained in the interim role for over two and a half years. His interim appointment (in 2010) was never an issue; it was only after he was submitted for confirmation that he was no longer eligible.

Again, if nobody--including the Supreme Court--had issue with Obama appointing Solomon to an interim officer role, why is it a problem for Whitaker? What's the material difference between the two situations?

 

[Chris Craig]

The Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 says pretty clearly that if a vacancy arises in a PAS office... notwithstanding paragraph (1), [the section that would have Rosenstein fill the role] the President “may direct” a person already serving in another PAS office, or a senior employee in the relevant agency, to serve in an acting capacity instead.

The decision in the NLRB case related to Lafe Solomon who was nominated for confirmation, whose nomination was then rescinded, but remained in the interim role for over two and a half years. His interim appointment (in 2010) was never an issue; it was only after he was submitted for confirmation that he was no longer eligible.

Again, if nobody--including the Supreme Court--had issue with Obama appointing Solomon to an interim officer role, why is it a problem for Whitaker? What's the material difference between the two situations?

• The President may direct a person currently serving in a different Senate-confirmed position to serve as acting officer.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

• The President may direct a person currently serving in a different Senate-confirmed position to serve as acting officer.

Subsection (a)(3) adds that “notwithstanding paragraph (1),” the President “may direct” a person to perform acting duties if the person served in a senior position in the relevant agency for at least 90 days in the 365-day period preceding the vacancy. (Bottom of page 8)

Still waiting for a difference between this situation and Lafe Solomon in the NLRB (who was not previously serving in a Senate-confirmed position, but was at the time the Director of the NLRB’s Office of Representation Appeals--same link, top of page 10)

 

[Chris Craig]

Subsection (a)(3) adds that “notwithstanding paragraph (1),” the President “may direct” a person to perform acting duties if the person served in a senior position in the relevant agency for at least 90 days in the 365-day period preceding the vacancy. (Bottom of page 8)

Still waiting for a difference between this situation and Lafe Solomon in the NLRB (who was not previously serving in a Senate-confirmed position, but was at the time the Director of the NLRB’s Office of Representation Appeals--same link, top of page 10)

"(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any person if

"(A) such person is serving as the first assistant to the office of an officer described under subsection (a);

"(B) the office of such first assistant is an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate; and

"(C) the Senate has approved the appointment of such person to such office.

He has not been approved by the senate

 

[PtldPlatypus]

"(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any person if

"(A) such person is serving as the first assistant to the office of an officer described under subsection (a);

"(B) the office of such first assistant is an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate; and

"(C) the Senate has approved the appointment of such person to such office.

He has not been approved by the senate

We're not talking about (2) Paragraph (1). and none of those caveats apply anyway.

 

[Strenuus]

I briefly thought about going into law.


After reading this, me choosing not to go into law is one of the best decisions I ever made. Holy hell this is confusing.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I briefly thought about going into law.


After reading this, me choosing not to go into law is one of the best decisions I ever made. Holy hell this is confusing.

See, I'm just the opposite. Poring over some of the text of the statute and the SC decision made me regret not going into law, and makes me look forward to 10 years from now when my naturally-loophole-seeking son is in law school.

 

[Strenuus]

See, I'm just the opposite. Poring over some of the text of the statute and the SC decision made me regret not going into law, and makes me look forward to 10 years from now when my naturally-loophole-seeking son is in law school.

ha. I was joking mainly. It'd of never been a passion, to whereas now I am following a passion. So it worked out.

Nice description of your son, by the way. LOL.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

ha. I was joking mainly. It'd of never been a passion, to whereas now I am following a passion. So it worked out.

Nice description of your son, by the way. LOL.

Oh I've been telling him for years that he is a born lawyer. Dude will argue semantics till the cows come home.

Fortunately, I'm better at it than he is.

 

[barfo]

Oh I've been telling him for years that he is a born lawyer. Dude will argue semantics till the cows come home.

Fortunately, I'm better at it than he is.

For now. Sounds like there will come a time...

barfo

 

[PtldPlatypus]

For now. Sounds like there will come a time...

barfo

'Twill be one of the prouder moments of my life when I can officially pass the baton.