web analytics
Categories
Uncategorized

Did Supreme Court Re-Establish Executive Power to Fire Political Operatives?

stock here: Gemini no like the take, throws flak. Hmmmm….I hope it’s true.

The speaker, “Dr. Steve,” claims that the Supreme Court has handed President Trump a major victory that acts as a “legal nuclear weapon” against the “administrative state” or “deep state.”

Key Points:

  • The Supreme Court’s Action: The speaker alleges the Supreme Court issued a decisive 6-3 ruling that shattered nearly a century of protection for unelected bureaucrats from presidential reach.
  • Overturning Humphrey’s Executive: The core of the argument is that this new development is effectively the “death certificate” for the “deep state’s” power, which has been protected since the 1935 Supreme Court case, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States.
  • Humphrey’s Executive Precedent: This 1935 decision allegedly made it illegal for the President to fire bureaucrats on commissions (like those in the FTC, SEC, NLRB, etc.), thus creating an “untouchable class” of federal commissioners who could defy Presidents and voters. These are described as “independent agencies,” but the speaker argues they are independent from the American people.
  • The Test Case: The recent ruling stems from President Trump’s firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter, a Biden appointee, simply for “policy disagreements.” This was a direct challenge to the Humphrey’s Executive precedent, as commissioners could previously only be fired for “malfeasance in office” or blatant corruption.
  • Current Status: While a lower court initially ordered her reinstatement, the Supreme Court has now stepped in, allowing Trump’s firing to stand and, more significantly, agreeing to hear arguments in December on whether to overturn Humphrey’s Executive entirely.
  • Impact: The speaker asserts that overturning this precedent will confirm the President’s executive power, allowing him to remove any commission member for any reason, thereby dismantling the “permanent bureaucracy” and the “administrative state,” which they argue the Founding Fathers never intended. The speaker frames this as a fulfillment of what voters elected the President to do.

Disclaimer: This summary is based only on the statements made by the speaker in the provided video transcript. The speaker presents a highly partisan interpretation of a Supreme Court action, using terms like “deep state,” “administrative state,” and “autopen appointee.” The Supreme Court case mentioned is real, but the speaker’s claims about its complete or imminent overturn, the context of the firing, and the legal implications should be independently verified. The speaker indicates the Court has agreed to hear arguments in December, which means a final, official overturning has not yet occurred as of the video’s recording.

profile picture

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *