Court Loss (Maybe A Win)

On Saturday, D.C. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled that President Donald Trump violated federal law in firing Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel. According to Jonathan Turley, a Constitutional expert, Jackson’s decision is forceful and well-written.  Some notable members of the Left were almost giddy at the results.

However, this glee may be short-lived.  This loss may actually be what the Trump administration wanted.  Why?  Because Turley also notes that the decision is challengeable under existing precedent. And this may become the grounds for a major constitutional challenge.  And that challenge could very well help to return the country to the Constitution of our forefathers.

Mark Wauck notes:

Turley states that the judge in the case—Amy Berman Jackson—is perfectly correct in her understanding of the statute that purports to govern the factual situation—Trump’s firing of Dellinger ‘just because.’ However, Jackson ignores other precedent, relying exclusively on the old Humphrey’s Executor case from 1935. 

There are other more recent SCOTUS cases that have been adjudicated in the favor of such power within the Executive branch.  Mark Wauck notes:

The Civil Service Reform Act provided four agency heads “tenure protection”—that is, the heads of those four agencies, by the terms of the law, cannot be fired ‘just because’. The president, said Congress, must provide a reason—”inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” The Roberts Court has taken on two such cases—in 2020 and in 2021—and in both has ruled that Executive Article Two powers were infringed upon. But the decisions were narrowly framed, rather than simply overturning the offending provisions of the law. 

Interestingly, the Biden Office of Legal Counsel extended this reasoning to a third officer, the Commissioner of Social Security and the lower courts have also gotten the message.  So, the question here is will SCOTUS once again narrowly define the outcome or will a more general and wide ranging ruling be the result?

This raises another interesting question.  It appears that some of the Executive Orders are designed to elicit legal challenges.  These challenges seek to define a return to constitutionalism to America.  This is the very opposite of what the Left wants.

I think it is time to get some more popcorn.