Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
How the Supreme Court is using Trump to grab more power for itself - Ian Millhiser @ Vox
Vox - Gift LinkIf you’ve followed the Supreme Court’s recent presidential power cases, you know there’s no mystery surrounding the Court’s eventual decision in Trump v. Slaughter, a case asking if President Donald Trump may fire several high-ranking federal officials who are protected from being terminated by federal law.
All six members of the Court’s Republican majority are devout acolytes of the “unitary executive,” a legal theory that claims the president may fire nearly anyone who leads a federal agency. The specific question before the Court in Slaughter is whether the Constitution permitted Trump to fire Rebecca Slaughter, who previously served as one of five commissioners on the Federal Trade Commission.
The Republican justices already concluded, albeit in a temporary order, that Trump may fire Slaughter in an order handed down in September. Though the justices heard oral argument in the Slaughter case on Monday morning, that argument is largely political theater preceding the Court’s inevitable decision that Slaughter may be fired permanently.
While on its face the Slaughter case is a case about presidential power, a few key justices signaled that they are comfortable giving Trump the power he seeks in this case because the Court will itself remain a check on the president.
The Court’s Republican majority, in other words, plans to remake the separation of powers among the three US branches of government into a kind of hierarchy. Under this new vision, Congress’s power to create “independent” agencies that enjoy some insulation from the president must yield to a more powerful executive. And the executive’s authority over these agencies must, in turn, yield to a more powerful Supreme Court.
All six members of the Court’s Republican majority are devout acolytes of the “unitary executive,” a legal theory that claims the president may fire nearly anyone who leads a federal agency. The specific question before the Court in Slaughter is whether the Constitution permitted Trump to fire Rebecca Slaughter, who previously served as one of five commissioners on the Federal Trade Commission.
The Republican justices already concluded, albeit in a temporary order, that Trump may fire Slaughter in an order handed down in September. Though the justices heard oral argument in the Slaughter case on Monday morning, that argument is largely political theater preceding the Court’s inevitable decision that Slaughter may be fired permanently.
While on its face the Slaughter case is a case about presidential power, a few key justices signaled that they are comfortable giving Trump the power he seeks in this case because the Court will itself remain a check on the president.
The Court’s Republican majority, in other words, plans to remake the separation of powers among the three US branches of government into a kind of hierarchy. Under this new vision, Congress’s power to create “independent” agencies that enjoy some insulation from the president must yield to a more powerful executive. And the executive’s authority over these agencies must, in turn, yield to a more powerful Supreme Court.
How the Supreme Court is using Trump to grab more power for itself www.vox.com/politics/471...
— Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser.bsky.social) 2025-12-08T19:00:05.632Z
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
