James Burnham Profile picture
Jul 21 10 tweets 3 min read Read on X
The district judges in New Jersey are thinking about replacing @realdonaldtrump’s chosen US Attorney—@USAttyHabba—with someone the judges choose under a statute purporting to give them that power. But if the judges attempt that move, it should fail. Here’s why. 1/ Image
First the basics. Article II vests all executive power in the President. That includes the prosecution power of U.S. Attorneys. For @POTUS to properly exercise that power, he must be able to freely hire and fire all subordinates who wield it. 2/
As Chief Justice Taft—a former @POTUS himself—wrote in Myers: “The President, alone and unaided, could not execute the laws. He must execute them by the assistance of subordinates.” Again, that includes US Attorneys. 3/
Ok lets get to New Jersey. There is a statute that allows the Attorney General to appoint US Attorneys directly—appointments last 120 days. @AGPamBondi appointed @USAttyHabba under this provision. 4/
The same statute says if there is no senate-confirmed US Attorney after 120 days, then “the district court for such district may appoint a United States attorney to serve until the vacancy is filled.” 28 USC 546(d). Wait what? The judges pick their own prosecutor? 5/
I am not aware of a modern example of courts exercising this supposed power to install a US Attorney, but @realDonaldTrump could plainly remove any such person immediately pursuant to Article II. That issue would (or should) be 9-0 at the Supreme Court. 6/
But what about @USAttyHabba? @realdonaldtrump is entitled to keep her in office for as long as he wants. The simplest path would be for @AGPamBondi to appoint @USAttyHabba the “First Assistant United States Attorney” in New Jersey. Then, under a different statute (the Federal Vacancies Act), @USAttyHabba would again be Acting U.S. Attorney (now via her status as the "first assistant" to that role). 7/
The @thejusticedept knows this, as they recently did the same in the Northern District of New York @NDNYnews for John Sarcone—another US Attorney whom @AGPamBondi appointed and whom the Administration is entitled to keep. 8/

wxxinews.org/new-york-publi…Image
Or if @TheJusticeDept really wanted to underscore the point, @realdonaldtrump could remove the judges' selected US Attorney and @AGPamBondi could potentially reappoint @USAttyHabba under the same AG Appt statute used before. Nothing in the statute clearly precludes this.  9/
Bottom line: @POTUS has broad authority over @TheJusticeDept and who serves in it. That includes US Attorneys. There is this a clear legal path to keep @USAttyHabba in office if the Administration wants to take it. /fin

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with James Burnham

James Burnham Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @BurnhamDC

Jul 18
The @WSJopinion has an editorial today arguing three basic things: (1) Emil Bove is a poor judicial nominee, (2) his nomination will stop other judges from retiring, (3) other Trump nominees are better and will induce more retirements. I broadly disagree. 1/ Image
First, as I have written elsewhere, Emil Bove is a strong nominee right down the fairway of @realdonaldtrump’s long track record of excellent appointments. He has strong credentials and is a senior official @TheJusticeDept in the Administration. Straightforward pick. 2/ Image
What about @WSJopinion's objections? The main objection concerns a meeting in which Bove allegedly asked colleagues about defying a potential court order and did so using profane language. Lets unpack both claims. 3/
Read 11 tweets
Jul 16
This is an important and creative suit by @USDOJ asserting @realdonaldtrump's constitutional authority over the Executive Branch. Here's why. 1/
The President removed the Board Members of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting—the infamous funding vehicle for @NPR and @PBS.  These Board Members—as other terminated federal officials have done—sued the President to hold onto their offices.  But importantly, they lost..  2/
Case closed, right? Wrong. Rather than accede to the court's ruling, the officials refused to leave.  They continued to unlawfully commandeer their offices, sending more taxpayer dollars to @NPR and @PBS. 3/
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(