Civil servants who were dismissed by Trump request his power in the Court of Appeal: NPR

Appeal judge in Washington, DC, is the key question on Friday: Does the president have the constitutional authority to dismiss the agencies created by the congress as independent of the White House?

In particular, President Trump exceeded when he, Gwynne Wilcox, and member of the Merit Systems Protection Board, member of the National Labor Relations Board, Cathy Harris, from her positions for no reason?

The judges of the Lower Court already said, citing a decision of the Supreme Court of 1935 in 1935, Humphrey's executor The latter confirmed the congress to the president's distance powers. The judges temporarily ordered Wilcox and Harris to their seats.

The Trump government, however, appealed and argued that the judges of the plain were wrong when interpreting this decision from 1935 and that they had exceeded their authority in order to organize the reinstatement. After a few returns with the DC Circuit of Appeals, the Supreme Court joined the Circuit of Appeals on April 9. The top judge John Roberts gave the way for Wilcox and Harris until the merits of their cases could be taken into account.

On Friday, the judge of the DC Circuit Court, Florence Pan, a Biden representative, worked skeptically to the government and was temporarily combative with the lawyer of the Trump administration. The other two judges of the committee, Justin Walker and Gregory Katsas – both Trump -Northerns – have previously supported the government's attitude that the Trump's constitution is broad to remove civil servants who help him fulfill his duties.

Independence of the agency at the game

In this case, not only the jobs in Wilcox and Harris, but the jobs of people who have released Trump in a similar way elsewhere are also on the Federal Trade Commission and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

The congress created these “independent agencies” with some protective measures from political interference into the law. They are led by bodies or commissions, the members of which are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

The congress demanded that these bodies or commissions are non -partisan, with democratic and republican members serve staggered terms. According to the law, the President can only dismiss members for reasons, such as B. neglect of obligation or misconduct.

According to the Trump government, such restrictions are unconstitutional, while the congress has largely been silent on this topic.

“Article II of the US constitution transfers the entire executive power of a single president who is solely responsible for the people,” Trump wrote in his letter to Wilcox and ended her.

Wilcox and Harris have warned that a judgment in favor of the President would endanger the independence of other government agencies, including the Federal Reserve. If the Court of Justice determines that Trump has the constitutional authority to dismiss it, they warn, then nothing will stand in the way of fed chairman Jerome Powell.

The Trump administration has tried to suppress these fears and write in court files that the Federal Reserve is “a unique institution with a unique story and a unique background” and enables it to be insulated by the president's control.

“That doesn't keep up,” wrote Harris' lawyers in her answer. “There is no coherent gone to create a special exception of” Federal Reserve “that holds the destructive effects of government theory.”

On Friday in court, Pan pushed the Trump government lawyer, Harry Graver. She repeatedly asked if he believes that there is an independent agency in which the president should not have the authority to remove civil servants at will and later carry out the Fed.

After Graver repeated the position of the government that the Fed had a unique story, he argued that the FED asked a clear constitutional question that is not before the Court.

Pan expressed frustration through this answer and said that the court had to understand the effects of a judgment that could spend it.

Competing interpretations of the constitution

Wilcox and Harris have argued that overturned Humphrey's executor would create chaos. The Trump administration claims that it does not try to lift the legal precedent.

Rather, the government's lawyers have argued this Humphrey's executor does not apply to Wilcox and Harris in view of the “essential executive authority” that their agencies do today – the power of the Trump government says that the Supreme Court did not consider 90 years ago.

The way the lawyers of the Trump administration describe it: The constitution transmits the executive power – all of it – in the president. A court cannot force the president to keep someone he does not trust to carry out his policy.

“The heads of the agencies within the executive have to share the goals of my administration and their commitment to the will of the American people,” wrote Trump in his letter to Wilcox.

Wilcox 'lawyers call this an aggressive new interpretation of the constitution. You have argued that the powers of the National Labor Relations Board – including the monitoring of the union elections, the hearing Appeal on work disputes, issuing remedial measures and rules in relation to the execution of the federal government are not almost as wide as the government, and states that the board must go to court to enforce their decisions.

Harris' lawyers now raise that the government is trying to get involved Humphrey's executor “In Oblivion” argue that the Merit Systems Protection Board does not apply, the employment complaints of federal workers hear against their agencies.

“If this board is not under constitutional law Humphrey's executorNothing is, “they wrote a letter in a court.

In court, Katsas questioned the lawyers of Harris and Wilcox in detail on Friday about the “Nitty-Greaty” of the functions of their agencies, including their political and government powers. Harris's lawyer, Nathaniel Zelinsky, argued that the MSPB only creates rules that are purely processed and compared them with “boring court rules” about the submission of letter.

The Wilcox Deepak Gupta lawyer spoke about the curved structure of the National Labor Relations Board, in which the General Counsel, which serves as the pleasure of the President and can be released at will, is solely responsible for deciding which cases should be determined. The Board of Directors acts as an agency as an appellate court and occurs after the judges of the administrative law have made the first decisions.

All parties agreed that it was not ahead of an appellate court to overthrow the precedent of the Supreme Court – that the fate of Humphrey's executor is a question that the Supreme Court has to tackle itself.

“We are the middle management,” said Pan.