- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 3/2/25 at 8:55 am to Godfather1
quote:She is an "activist" because she does not embrace the Imperial Presidency Theory (excuse me, the Unified Executive Theory) of the Constitution.
Not a judge. An activist in a black robe.
OK.
You be you, mi amigo, but I personally see a system of checks-and-balances as being a damned good way to limit governmental overreach ... by any branch of the government.
This post was edited on 3/2/25 at 8:57 am
Posted on 3/2/25 at 8:55 am to GumboPot
Women are unfit to serve in any serious role in government
Posted on 3/2/25 at 8:56 am to AggieHank86
quote:
She is an "activist" because she does not embrace the Imperial Presidency Theory (excuse me, the Unified Executive Theory) of the Constitution.
OK.
No.
She’s an activist because time and time again, she’s shown herself to be one.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 8:57 am to AggieHank86
Clinton fired over 300,000 federal workers when he started his presidency. What Trump is doing is not unprecedented.
ETA: I just asked Grok. The number is 429,000.
ETA: I just asked Grok. The number is 429,000.
This post was edited on 3/2/25 at 9:00 am
Posted on 3/2/25 at 8:58 am to AggieHank86
She brandishes a dish of liberal jurisprudence with a flavor of Yankee vanilla, would you say swanky Hanky...
Posted on 3/2/25 at 8:59 am to GumboPot
Seems like terminating a watch dog for no reason before the end of the term set by congress for the appointment is unconstitutional to me.
This administration’s view of the extent of executive power is not in line with the constitution at times. But I know you diehards who slurp anything your partisan media shits out will hate to hear that.
This administration’s view of the extent of executive power is not in line with the constitution at times. But I know you diehards who slurp anything your partisan media shits out will hate to hear that.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:03 am to Diego Ricardo
Then there is the realistic part of this issue: if this office is truly independent then Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel should be able to fund his own salary and his staff’s salaries.
This post was edited on 3/2/25 at 9:04 am
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:04 am to GumboPot
quote:
: if this office is truly independent then Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel should be able to fund his own salary and his staff’s salaries.
That doesn't make any sense as it ignores the role of Congress entirely
They decide who gets funds, not the executive
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:09 am to GumboPot
quote:
Then there is the realistic part of this issue: if this office is truly independent then Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel should be able to fund his own salary and his staff’s salaries.
The crux of the issue is not that they're truly independent of the executive branch but that the executive branch cannot terminate their appointment prior to the end of their term without cause. The executive nominated this appointment and congress consented. The terms of the appointment were dictated by a bill from congress that was signed by the executive. Just because a new person leads the executive, doesn't mean they don't have to play by the rules set on the field they inherited.
The Trump braintrust would like their diehards to believe that but that is not how the US rule of law works. He has great discretion but not unlimited discretion.
This post was edited on 3/2/25 at 9:14 am
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:14 am to Diego Ricardo
Well the one issue is that in this specific instance, restrictions on an appointed position may not be Constitutional, as that's a specific power granted to the Executive in the Constitution.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:18 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That doesn't make any sense as it ignores the role of Congress entirely
They decide who gets funds, not the executive
While it may be "viewed" that way, the OBM actually cuts the checks. And they can decide whether build back better translates to condoms in gaza city africa, or the green deal is 2 billion in stacey's bank account.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:20 am to Diego Ricardo
It was mentioned earlier, what is stopping a brain dead Biden on his way out from appointing one of his flunkies from wrecking shop on the new guy? If the executive branch has the authority to appoint then the executive branch has the authority to dismiss. The president should and must have the pervue to put the people he wants in his administration.This is an issue within the executive branch not the judicial or legislative branch.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:33 am to Branson
quote:
It was mentioned earlier, what is stopping a brain dead Biden on his way out from appointing one of his flunkies from wrecking shop on the new guy? If the executive branch has the authority to appoint then the executive branch has the authority to dismiss. The president should and must have the pervue to put the people he wants in his administration.This is an issue within the executive branch not the judicial or legislative branch.
I don't know if this is a constitutional issue or not but a lot of what I see as assertions of executive authority from conservative thinktanks are a conceptual issue. Ironically, what the Heritage Foundation et al imagines for the executive branch seems to be a reversion to the Jacksonian spoils model. After the civil rights amendments, arguably the GOP's biggest achievements of late 19th century were civil service reform. Largely removing cronyism from the system and making federal employment merit based beyond the very top of the executive departmental system. Conceptually, IG types really should not be seen as the execution part of the executive but the auditor. If you can appoint your own auditor, you can usually bet on passing the audit. And if you don't, you surely won't be advertising it.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:35 am to Branson
quote:
what is stopping a brain dead Biden on his way out from appointing one of his flunkies from wrecking shop on the new guy?
In theory, the terms. Biden could only do this, in this hypo, if the term was up.
Otherwise, he'd have to fire the person, which is exactly what Trump is trying to do
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:38 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
because once they create a body with any Executive prerogative
It’s not that the body has Executive prerogative. It’s that the office is Executive.
Biden appointed Dellinger. Not Congress.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:39 am to Diego Ricardo
quote:
Conceptually, IG types really should not be seen as the execution part of the executive but the auditor. If you can appoint your own auditor, you can usually bet on passing the audit. And if you don't, you surely won't be advertising it.
Correct.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:41 am to the808bass
quote:
It’s not that the body has Executive prerogative. It’s that the office is Executive.
*constrained to the limits given to it by Congress
quote:
Biden appointed Dellinger. Not Congress.
Already covered (you must have missed it) in that post
quote:
The question is what limits Congress has on its own creation outside of specific Constitutional references (like the appointment Clause).
quote:
Historically, the Executive was limited to the specific power within the specific framework of the words of Congress (again, outside of specific language in the Constitution).
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:44 am to GumboPot
You do realize that “civics”relies in large part ion the Constitution and statutory authority, right?
Posted on 3/2/25 at 9:44 am to SlowFlowPro
If the existing President gets to appoint an OIG then it’s not an OIG and Berman’s ruling is exactly as retarded as it looks.
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News