Friday, June 9, 2023
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Email Whitelisting
Best Retirement Wishes
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock
  • Top News
No Result
View All Result
Best Retirement Wishes
Home Stock

Presidents Must Take Accountability for the Officers They Choose

by
May 1, 2023
in Stock
0
0
SHARES
2
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Thomas A. Berry

The Constitution requires, as a default rule, that “Officers of the United States” must be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The Constitution allows only one potential exception to this default rule: If an officer is merely an “inferior officer,” Congress may waive Senate consent. But even if an officer is inferior, Congress is limited to only three choices for who may appoint that officer: “the President alone,” “the Heads of Departments,” and “the Courts of Law.”

Related posts

High Court Sticks With Flawed Racial‐​Redistricting Standard

June 8, 2023

The First Amendment Protects Against Bad‐​Faith Prosecutions

June 8, 2023

The Federal Vacancies Reform Act (FVRA) is one such statute that vests appointments in “the President alone.” Specifically, it grants the president authority to unilaterally appoint temporary, time‐​limited “acting officers” to fill vacancies in positions that normally require Senate consent.

When President Trump took office in January 2017, the acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA) resigned. A new acting commissioner, Nancy Berryhill, then purportedly took office. But President Trump did not select Berryhill to be acting commissioner. Rather, Berryhill was elevated pursuant to a Succession Order issued by outgoing President Obama the previous month, which named and ranked positions (not people) within SSA to fill potential future vacancies in the office of commissioner.

Plaintiff Brian Dahle later challenged an action that Berryhill took as acting commissioner, arguing that Berryhill was not validly serving under the terms of the FVRA when she took the action. Although a district court ruled in Dahle’s favor, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed. The panel rejected Dahle’s statutory arguments, holding that Berryhill was validly appointed by former President Obama as acting commissioner under the terms of the Succession Order. The panel held that even though Obama was not the president when Berryhill was elevated, “presidential orders without specific time limitations carry over from administration to administration” and “a new president does not have to take affirmative action to keep existing orders in place.”

Dahle is now petitioning for rehearing by either the panel or the full Eighth Circuit, and the Cato Institute has filed an amicus brief supporting that petition. In the brief, we point out that the panel’s statutory holding raises a serious constitutional problem: Berryhill’s elevation via Succession Order was not an “appointment” under the meaning of the Constitution.

In The Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton explained that because the president alone would be responsible for choosing nominees, “The blame of a bad nomination would fall upon the President singly and absolutely.” But if an appointment is made by contingency order rather than by name, then the accountability mandated by the Appointments Clause vanishes. The people cannot blame President Obama for Berryhill’s performance, because Obama did not choose Berryhill for the position. Indeed, the people cannot blame any single person for Berryhill’s accession to the position of acting commissioner, because her accession resulted from the combined actions and inactions of no fewer than four people. That is precisely the diffusion of accountability that the Appointments Clause forbids.

The Eighth Circuit should grant rehearing to reconsider its decision in light of the Appointments Clause. When there is no clear line of accountability for a nomination, political accountability suffers. Requiring the president to take accountability for federal officers by actually naming those officers is not too much to ask.

Previous Post

How the Woke Left Is Destroying Education

Next Post

The 2023 Bitcoin Policy Summit: Shining a Light on the Infrastructure Act

Next Post

The 2023 Bitcoin Policy Summit: Shining a Light on the Infrastructure Act

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Get the daily email that makes reading the news actually enjoyable. Stay informed and entertained, for free.
Your information is secure and your privacy is protected. By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Remember that you can opt-out any time, we hate spam too!

RECOMMENDED NEWS

It’s Never Too Late to Begin Protesting against the Proposed Central Bank Digital Currency

It’s Never Too Late to Begin Protesting against the Proposed Central Bank Digital Currency

4 months ago

Professor Shawn Ritenour: The Vital Role Of The Entrepreneur In Economic Development

2 months ago

Roald Dahl and James Bond Books Are Getting Woke Rewrites. Copyright Law Ensures You Can’t Stop Them.

3 months ago

Friday Feature: Compass Educators and Ellemercito Academy

3 weeks ago

BROWSE BY CATEGORIES

  • Economy
  • Editor's Pick
  • Stock
  • Top News
Get the daily email that makes reading the news actually enjoyable. Stay informed and entertained, for free.
Your information is secure and your privacy is protected. By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Remember that you can opt-out any time, we hate spam too!

POPULAR NEWS

  • How Can We Restore Freedom and Sound Money in the US and the UK? Some Ideas

    How Can We Restore Freedom and Sound Money in the US and the UK? Some Ideas

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • How not to answer the question “Why are carbon taxes unpopular with policymakers and politicians?”

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • I went to 2+ climate change sessions at the ASSA meetings

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Just Say No to the New Forever War

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Why the End of the Petrodollar Spells Trouble for the US Regime

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0

Disclaimer

BestRetirementWishes.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively "The Company") do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

Recent News

  • High Court Sticks With Flawed Racial‐​Redistricting Standard
  • The First Amendment Protects Against Bad‐​Faith Prosecutions
  • There Is No Moral Right to Strike

Category

  • Economy
  • Editor's Pick
  • Stock
  • Top News

Recent News

High Court Sticks With Flawed Racial‐​Redistricting Standard

June 8, 2023

The First Amendment Protects Against Bad‐​Faith Prosecutions

June 8, 2023
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Email Whitelisting

© 2021 BestRetirementWishes. All Rights Reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Email Whitelisting
  • Home 1
  • Privacy Policy
  • suspicious-engagement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Thank You

© 2021 BestRetirementWishes. All Rights Reserved.