Exactly! That is not going to fly, even with this Court (1792, 1795 Vacancy Acts). If the President claims inherent authority under Article II to name acting officials only when the Vacancies Act does not apply, that assertion depends on a very peculiar & implausible interpretation of Article II.
Reposted from
Michael Herz
If he had inherent authority, would the Vacancies Act be unconstitutional, since it limits that authority with regard to the positions to which it does apply? And is that argument next on the list?
Comments
Congress has several ✅/⚖️ over the executive branch:
Reject overall budget
Reject appointments
Reject treaties
Override vetoes
Impeachment
But they can’t dictate how POTUS controls the executive branch
Including hiring & firing within agencies under his branch
Gone are the loosey goosey days of the radical justices and their living document fantasy
The constitution says what it says and doesn’t say what it doesn’t say
And it doesn’t limit POTUS power over the executive branch
If there are enough votes.
And maybe they already tried to assassinate him and failed.
Just like they failed to remove him a few years ago, lol
But what vision have the Democrats?
Anwer: same same as rising prices under Biden.
Democrats are born losers. I saw them lose for the last 40 years.