| ▲ | andsoitis an hour ago |
| Are you claiming the US president does not have the right to fire them? |
|
| ▲ | SpicyLemonZest an hour ago | parent [-] |
| I reject the premise. The President is not a king, he isn't presumptively allowed to fire anyone he'd like. The statute establishing the National Science Board (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1863) does not give him any such power, so he doesn't have it. |
| |
| ▲ | andsoitis 34 minutes ago | parent [-] | | NSB members are executive officers, the statute is silent on removal, and Article II makes presidential removal power the default. Silence means he can fire them. | | |
| ▲ | SpicyLemonZest 16 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Article II says no such thing. Humphrey's Executor established a useful compromise between "the Constitution is silent on removal" and "come on, is it really impossible to fire a postmaster?", but Trump has chosen to defect from that compromise so I no longer feel bound to accept it. Until he reinstates all independent agency heads he's purported to fire, I don't accept any removals he performs without explicit authority as legitimate. |
|
|