Washington – President Trump’s lawyers reminded the Supreme Court over the weekend what they called “attacks on the power of separation with immediate relief.”
The reason they were unhappy was that a federal judge in Washington temporarily blocked the whistleblower unit appointed by Congress in 1978.
The emergency appeal was first given to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.
This will mark the first time the High Court has adopted legal requirements induced by the new Trump administration.
On a broader issue, the question is whether Congress can impose restrictions on the president’s power to control the government.
For more than a hundred years, Congress has enacted laws to create independent institutions, such as the Federal Reserve, to regulate the money supply and the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate Wall Street. It also creates dozens of other semi-independent commissions and boards.
Conservatives believe that the Constitution holds all executive powers in the hands of the president and they oppose these independent institutions.
However, it is unlikely that the Supreme Court will resolve this far-reaching dispute at the highest or swift.
The emergency attraction of this week is more likely to be the opening ceremony. And the use of a fast track procedure may undermine the prospect of a clear ruling.
When President Carter signed the whistleblower law, he said the new Special Adviser office would become an independent legal body within the government.
“This will protect the rights of federal employees who whistle against the law, including the laws under its jurisdiction,” he said.
Last year, President Biden appointed Hampton Dellinger for five years and was confirmed by the Senate.
On February 7, Trump’s personnel director sent a sentence email to Dellinger, saying it had “effectively terminated.”
Dellinger filed a lawsuit, arguing that his sacking without reason was a “blatant disregard” of the law.
On Sunday, Trump’s lawyers said that if Dellinger is allowed to serve for another time or two weeks until the judge ruled the legality of his dismissal, “a serious issue of democratic legitimacy and election liability.”
Trump began his second term with active executive power, and his lawyers sounded confident that the Supreme Court might agree with them, especially in disputes involving federal officials.
Roberts said the president, as CEO, has the power to remove and replace officials who “represent the executive power.”
Five years ago, Roberts spoke with a 5-4 majority and striked the Consumer Finance Protection Agency rules because Congress said the president could not remove the head of the agency except for reasons. According to the original law, political divisions are not enough.
Roberts said the president is in charge of the executive branch, which includes the heads of controlling the executive body.
Trump’s lawyers cited the ruling, saying that the judge’s temporary restraining order prevented Dalinger’s firing was clearly unconstitutional and “violated the court’s precedent.”
U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson noted that Roberts cites the Office of Special Counsel in his 2020 comment. He said at the time that the OSC had no right to issue extensive national regulations, such as the Consumer Protection Agency.
“The OSC exercises only limited jurisdiction to enforce certain rules regarding federal government employers and employees,” he wrote.
When Jackson issued a temporary restraining order on February 12, she said she would hold a hearing on February 26 and then make a ruling.
But Trump’s lawyers immediately appealed to the U.S. District of Columbia Court of Appeal. It issued a 2-1 decision on Saturday night, refusing to put aside the judge’s orders.
Biden-appointed judges Michelle Childs and Florence Pan said the interim restraining orders could not be appealed because they were only short-term and temporary. They rejected the government’s call for “lack of jurisdiction”.
Trump-appointed opposition judge Gregory Katsas said the president’s appeal should be approved. “The president is exempt from the ban on directing the execution of formal duties,” he wrote.
Acting Attorney General Sarah Harris sent a 35-page emergency appeal to the Supreme Court on Sunday.
Roberts requested a response by Wednesday, suggesting the court plan to make a decision as soon as possible.
