file under: #acting #agency #admin #vacancy #FVRA #remedy #appointments #constitution #appointmentsclause #vacanciesact #dejure #defacto #antidelegation
it’s all about exclusivity baby. FVRA reigns supreme.
link to opinion:
⚖️😲 Judges Pick the Prosecutor_!
If a U.S. Attorney’s appointment expires after 120 days, the district court can step in and appoint a temporary replacement. ⚖️
Do you agree with this process?
#LawAndPolitics #ChecksAndBalances #AppointmentsClause #Primalaw
✅⚖️👇These bogus USAs are having a hard time in court. Who knew? #habba #appointmentsclause for the win.
🏛️👀 Filling Vacancies Without Senate
28 USC Section 546 allows the Attorney General to appoint a U.S. Attorney without Senate approval when there’s a vacancy. ⚖️
How do you feel about filling vacancies this way?
#Vacancies #LawAndPolitics #AppointmentsClause #Primalaw
📜✅ Senate Consent_ Who Needs It
Senate consent is required for top positions like the Attorney General, but inferior officers (like Assistant U.S. Attorneys) don’t always need Senate approval. ⚖️
What’s your take on this distinction?
#AppointmentsClause #SenateConsent #LawAndPolitics #Primalaw
📜 The President Can't Do It Alone
The Appointments Clause ensures the president needs Senate approval to appoint major officials. ⚖️
What’s your opinion on this requirement?
#AppointmentsClause #LawAndPolitics #Constitution #Primalaw
🏛️ Lying to Congress_ The Charge
The case against James Comey for lying to Congress brings up constitutional issues, ⚖️
Is this charge legitimate or more about political revenge?
#LawAndPolitics #AppointmentsClause #LyingToCongress #Primalaw
Kennedy v Braidwood: #SCOTUS reverses #5thCir: US Preventive Services Task Force members are inferior officers whose appointment by #HHS Secretary is consistent w/ #AppointmentsClause #ACA #insurance #healthcare #adminlaw #appellatesky #lawsky baffc.net/45Kzqn3
Before the case was narrowed to the #AppointmentsClause issue, the lawsuit included a #religious objection to being required to cover pre-exposure #prophylaxis for #HIV. They claimed that such drugs "facilitate & encourage homosexual behavior, prostitution, sexual promiscuity & intravenous drug […]
The case centers on whether the #USPSTF wields power to such an extent that members must be appointed by the #president & confirmed by the #Senate, as required by the #Constitution's #AppointmentsClause….
The task force is made up of #medical experts who serve 4yr terms on a volunteer basis. It […]
"Musk ... is a HIGH-RANKING government official. ... The White House has designated Musk a 'special government employee' IN CHARGE OF Establishing and Implementing the President's Department of Government Efficiency ('DOGE')."
#Musk's own attorneys in a Delaware court filing on Saturday wrote:
"Musk ... is a HIGH-RANKING government official. ... The White House has designated Musk a 'special government employee' IN CHARGE OF Establishing & Implementing the President's Department of […]
[Original post on masto.ai]
![Text from article:
While this drama is spilling out in the press, it’s legally relevant. Multiple challenges to Musk and the actions of his Department of Government Efficiency allege his vast authority violates the Appointments Clause, one of the Constitutions key anti-corruption measures. Under this clause, which the framers crafted to prevent the kingly practice of handing jobs and authority to unaccountable allies, any officer of the United States must be formally nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Moreover, such appointees must fill a role created by Congress. Musk’s exercise of vast authority, at least four lawsuits allege, is unconstitutional, as he was neither confirmed by the Senate nor is he serving in any role Congress created. “You don’t have to stretch the text very far to see that there is a problem under [the Appointments Clause in] Article Two,” says Jed Shugerman, a law professor and historian at Boston University School of Law.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:gcp5ldm4uzm7cmwxbb7fjel2/bafkreiaddxmsli7vdxmu54howwhf4t7ricel6ohfewiorrwr2aquyzlkgm)
Text from article: While this drama is spilling out in the press, it’s legally relevant. Multiple challenges to Musk and the actions of his Department of Government Efficiency allege his vast authority violates the Appointments Clause, one of the Constitutions key anti-corruption measures. Under this clause, which the framers crafted to prevent the kingly practice of handing jobs and authority to unaccountable allies, any officer of the United States must be formally nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Moreover, such appointees must fill a role created by Congress. Musk’s exercise of vast authority, at least four lawsuits allege, is unconstitutional, as he was neither confirmed by the Senate nor is he serving in any role Congress created. “You don’t have to stretch the text very far to see that there is a problem under [the Appointments Clause in] Article Two,” says Jed Shugerman, a law professor and historian at Boston University School of Law.
The Framers Had a Plan to Protect Us From Elon Musk
“If Trump gets away with doing this, we’re going back to the 18th century.”
www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/03/elon-mu...
"Multiple challenges to #Musk & the actions of […]
[Original post on newsie.social]
Plaintiffs agree that Musk has no formal legal authority to make the decisions at issue, but they assert that as a factual matter, Musk has exerted actual authority at USAID that only a properly appointed Officer can exercise. To deny Plaintiffs* Appointments Clause claim solely on the basis that, on paper, Musk has no formal legal authority relating to the decisions at issue, even if he is actually exercising significant authority on governmental matters, would open the door to an end-run around the Appointments Clause. If a President could escape Appointments Clause scrutiny
At this preliminary stage, the record demonstrates that, at least during the time period relevant to this Motion, Musk was, at a minimum, likely the official performing the duties and functions of the USDS Administrator. Even if viewed from the standpoint of the Senior Advisor position that he occupies on paper, the record of his activities to date establishes that his role has been and will continue to be as the leader of DOGE, with the same duties and degree of continuity as if he was formally in that position.…
Via Charlie Savage
In this new #DOGE / #USAID ruling, Judge Chuang basically calls bullshit on #Trump admin claim that #Musk isn't running DOGE because formally someone else is the administrator & on paper he's just a random WH adviser.
#law #Congress #AppointmentsClause
Judge Chuang found that #ElonMusk is unlawfully exercising power under the #AppointmentsClause. However, because some of the #USAID dismantling was done by #PeterMarocco — #Trump’s #State Dept Director of #ForeignAssistance — not #Musk, & the dismissed employees didn't sue #USAID, he limited […]
Headline: US judge orders DOGE, Musk to produce cost-cutting records By Reuters March 13, 2025 2:02 PM UTC
US judge orders DOGE, Musk to produce cost-cutting records
https://archive.is/lykiV#selection-1091.0-1091.58
"The states argued that #Musk violated the #Constitution by wielding power that only officials confirmed by the #US Senate can exercise under the […]
[Original post on newsie.social]
#ElonMusk #DOGE #TanyaChutkan #FederalCourt #TrumpAdministration #GovernmentEfficiency #LegalBattle #Transparency #Accountability #ConstitutionalLaw #DiscoveryRequests #FederalAgencies #CostCutting #ExecutiveBranch #DemocraticStates #AppointmentsClause #SenateConfirmation #FederalSpending #Law
The states argued #Musk violated the #Constitution by wielding #power only ofcls confirmed by the US #Senate can exercise under the #AppointmentsClause, & sought the materials through…discovery.
#Chutkan said her order focused mainly on who at #DOGE was making cost-cutting decisions & how far […]
The legal/constitutional basis for removing Musk! Essential reading. www.nytimes.com/2025/03/04/o...
#removemusk #appointmentsclause #fucktrump #ruleoflaw #fightfacism #resist
![Transcript from article (edited for length):
JUDGE KOLLAR-KOTELLY: ...Based on the record before me, I have some concerns about the constitutionality, frankly, of DOGE’s structure and operations.
...The Appointments Clause of the Constitution requires that principal officers be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Employees and inferior officers need to be supervised by principal officers to comply with the Appointments Clause.
I want to ask the few questions that I have about the status of people in DOGE. It appears to me that the people within DOGE could be exercising authority as officers of the United States without complying with the Appointments Clause. I think that’s something that the court should certainly note may be a problem…Maybe it’s not, but on this record we certainly don't have enough information…
Mr. Krause said in his Feb. 12 declaration that he coordinates with “officials” at USDS [DOGE]...“Officials” are not just employees. Those officials are people that could be in a different category than regular employees. My question is, who are the DOGE officials who give Mr. Krause direction? What are their titles? When DOGE officials provide high-level policy direction to a high-ranking employee at Treasury, are they exercising significant authority and discretion? If so, does that make them “officers” under the Appointments Clause? Were they nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate?](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:gcp5ldm4uzm7cmwxbb7fjel2/bafkreibv3sadk3u2hvgotbzgwiuzoadd6utdxhkmgva5k6zf2i6gfdkpvm)
Transcript from article (edited for length): JUDGE KOLLAR-KOTELLY: ...Based on the record before me, I have some concerns about the constitutionality, frankly, of DOGE’s structure and operations. ...The Appointments Clause of the Constitution requires that principal officers be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Employees and inferior officers need to be supervised by principal officers to comply with the Appointments Clause. I want to ask the few questions that I have about the status of people in DOGE. It appears to me that the people within DOGE could be exercising authority as officers of the United States without complying with the Appointments Clause. I think that’s something that the court should certainly note may be a problem…Maybe it’s not, but on this record we certainly don't have enough information… Mr. Krause said in his Feb. 12 declaration that he coordinates with “officials” at USDS [DOGE]...“Officials” are not just employees. Those officials are people that could be in a different category than regular employees. My question is, who are the DOGE officials who give Mr. Krause direction? What are their titles? When DOGE officials provide high-level policy direction to a high-ranking employee at Treasury, are they exercising significant authority and discretion? If so, does that make them “officers” under the Appointments Clause? Were they nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate?
"The #AppointmentsClause of the #Constitution requires that principal officers be nominated by the president & confirmed by the #Senate...
When #DOGE officials provide high-level policy direction to a high-ranking employee at #Treasury, are they exercising […]
[Original post on newsie.social]
#appointmentsclause (i.e. whose gonna check you boo?)
Text from transcript: Judge Kollar-Kotelly: The executive order states that agency heads shall select Doge team members in consultation with the USDS administrator. It seems there's no administrator to consult with. Who did the Treasury Secretary consult with when he hired Mr. Krause? And the executive order states the USDS administrator shall commence a software modernization initiative. Has the initiative been commenced? By whom? If there's no administrator, who did it? Humphreys: The team is going about modernizing and improving legacy systems--- Judge Kollar-Kotelly: What team??
Text from transcript: Humphreys: When I'm referring to the Treasury Doge team, I'm referring to Mr. Krause, previously, Mr. Elez, and now Mr. Wunderly. Judge Kollar-Kotelly: I mean, with Mr. Krause, it looks like there's no administrator telling him anything. I'm still having trouble grasping how they're going out as a team if nobody's telling them what to do other than the executive order... And it doesn't sound like you've prepared for these questions, which is unfortunate.
Text from transcript: Judge Kollar-Kotelly: But, as I understand it, there is no administrator. So, what the executive order says the administrator is supposed to be doing as USDS is not happening. And at this point we don't know who is actually doing these things that the administrator was supposed to do. Is that fair? Humphreys: I think that's fair... Again, the mission of the executive order was to modernize the technology... Judge KK: Right, but who decides the modernization? Or do decides what do to with the modernization? Humphreys: As we've described, Mr. Krause was selected because he has a wealth of experience. Judge KK: Selected by whom? Humphreys: Well, he was appointed by the Treasury in conjunction with USDS, officially. Judge KK: By USDS, but there's *NO* administrator? Humpreys: I don't know specifically who consulted with the secretary.
![Text from transcript:
Judge KK: Okay, so is there an administrator of Doge at the present time?
Humphreys: I don't know the answer to that.
Judge KK: You don't know whether there is an administrator, is that what you're saying?
Humpreys: I'm saying I don't know.
Judge KK [directing her attention to Humprey's co-counsel]: Okay, everybody at the table speak up over there if you know anything else.
[Silence.]](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:gcp5ldm4uzm7cmwxbb7fjel2/bafkreigtoir3ir2fzte2jtbxtj6ggdkgnt63bpgaqsyu6ytun2f5zsnzui)
Text from transcript: Judge KK: Okay, so is there an administrator of Doge at the present time? Humphreys: I don't know the answer to that. Judge KK: You don't know whether there is an administrator, is that what you're saying? Humpreys: I'm saying I don't know. Judge KK [directing her attention to Humprey's co-counsel]: Okay, everybody at the table speak up over there if you know anything else. [Silence.]
From legal analyst Anna Bower:
Judge Kollar-Kotelly grilled counsel for the government on DOGE's command structure.
Judge KK: Is there an administrator of Doge at the present time?
Govt Counsel: I don’t know the answer to that
The judge said the questions […]
[Original post on newsie.social]
Good analysis. "Elon Musk is currently waging two battles: ...Only one descriptor can be true; whichever one judge decides is accurate could determine whether Musk’s role is ultimately deemed constitutional." #whatauthoritydoesmuskhave #appointmentsclause #politics
From Chutkan’s ruling, “That said, Plaintiffs raise a colorable Appointments Clause claim with serious implications. Musk has not been nominated by the President nor confirmed by the U.S. Senate, as constitutionally required for officers who exercise "significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States.”
However, per Ryan Goodman, while Judge #Chutkan denied temporary restraining order in New Mexico v #ElonMusk, she signaled that the plaintiffs have the better argument when this reaches the merits: #Musk is exercising power in violation of #AppointmentsClause […]
[Original post on masto.ai]
SCOTUS grants cert in Becerra v. Braidwood, examining #AppointmentsClause challenge to U.S. Preventive Services Task Force structure and potential #severability of statutory provisions governing its oversight. Key #AdminLaw case. 24-316.
#DoGE lawsuit #AppointmentsClause please read pt2 #ElonitchkaMuskova What is the exact classification of #ElonMusk relationship to the government. If the dept is legal, then he should be subject to #Advise&Consent Attys? any words? #Checks&Balances #SpecialAdvisors #transparency #Signal (cont)
