Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (539700)	10/6/2025 4:52:42 PM
From: Doo	Respond to of 541183

Do we agree that the "unitary executive" concept applies to firings, overruling Humphrey's Executor, and the issue of declaring things "invasions" and the like is a separation of powers issue? I suppose there's some overlap, but without giving it really detailed time and attention, I think it's easier to keep the legal issue separate. Administrative agencies - part of the executive branch - are likely going to be found to be subject to the whim and will of the president, when it comes firing, staffing, charges, etc. even if Congress says otherwise by the statutes that created the agencies. I disagree with that notion, but that's not the question. Is this SC going to go that far on that issue? I think that's clear. Now, is the SC going to paint a broad brush when it gets cases where the president has declared things as "invasions," "wars," etc. and hold that no court can question or even review the matter? I think not. Though, I do think there'll be a few casualties to that piece of the Trump puzzle, as well. Birth right citizenship? Different issue altogether. Racial profiling by ICE? Different issue altogether. And, on and on it goes.