From: Here - A Constitutional Delusion

From: Here
A Constitutional Delusion

Robert Mueller is a far more qualified commentator on American law than I, but when he says the “long-standing ruling” of the Office of Special Counsel makes indicting the president of the United States “unconstitutional,” the evidence clearly implies he is dead wrong.

Look for any reference in the Constitution to the Office of Special Counsel.  You will find none.

The Office is a creation of Congress, empowered, in 1979, not 1787, originally to protect the merit system of the Civil Service.  It’s expanded authority comes from four federal statutes: the Civil Service Reform Act, the Whistleblower Protection Act, the Hatch Act, and the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act.

Its opinions and its inactions (for example, its utter failure to protect the merit system of the Federal Civil Service from the abuses inflicted on it by the Trump administration) are political and not Constitutional.

If the attorney general is legitimately “The People’s Lawyer,” the Office of Special Counsel has illegitimately abandoned its assigned responsibilities to become the president’s consiglieri, as Mario Puzo used the word in The Godfather. The AG him or herself is not a Constitutional authority.  The Attorney General’s opinions on the Constitution, unlike those of the Supreme Court, have no more validity than yours or mine.

Granting impunity to a criminal president is not an idea ever contemplated, much less ratified, by the men who wrote the Constitution.  If you disagree, find the citations.

The first pledge of every Democratic wannabe candidate for president should be to put the Special Counsel Office back into the tiny box of clearly delimited roles for which it was created.

No one in America, especially the president, should be above the law.  The next president should order the next Office of Legal Counsel to say so.  And then, to STFU and stick to its mundane administrative business.

Believe me, this necessary adjustment will not demand a Constitutional amendment, just a president who believes in the Rule of Law.

— dmarash

TOP

Subscribe

Subscribe to insider notes from Dave Marash along with previews and cartoons of upcoming podcasts. You’ll be richer, taller, and if you don’t eat, thinner.

Donate

Here & There is kept afloat by wonderful sponsors and curious listeners like you. Your support is appreciated!

Connect

LOADING