On Monday, John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog posted an article asking the question, “Who Runs the Executive Branch?” During the past four years, that was a very appropriate question, but it is still an appropriate question.
The article reports:
Under Article II of the Constitution, the President is the executive branch. But over the years, Congress has tried to limit the power of the President by establishing a number of “independent” agencies–the SEC, the FDIC, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, and so on. In many cases, Congress has purported to limit the President’s ability to fire employees of those “independent” agencies, even though they are part of the executive branch and nominally under his control.
Democrats like this arrangement, since the agencies are staffed overwhelmingly by Democrats. They have served to undermine every Republican president of the last generation. Until now, Republican Presidents have generally put up with the fact that they do not effectively control the executive branch, but President Trump has moved to assert his proper constitutional authority in several ways.
Most notably, in February he issued an executive order which we wrote about here. It asserted, in several ways, his authority over the “independent” agencies. He has also fired a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve for cause, and, more importantly, he has fired other executive branch officials without cause, as should be his prerogative under Article II.
This has given rise to the vitally important case of Slaughter v. Trump. Rebecca Slaughter was a Federal Trade Commissioner. President Trump fired her without asserting any “cause,” even though the Federal Trade Commission Act says that a Commissioner can be removed by the President only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” The administration takes the position–correctly, I think–that this limitation on the President’s control of the executive branch is unconstitutional.
The article concludes:
What is being teed up here is, ultimately, an epic battle between Congress and the President. Democrats are on the side of Congress, mostly because Congress has, in turn, ceded power to the Administrative State, which is overwhelmingly Democratic but which, as Professor Philip Hamburger among others has persuasively argued, is essentially unconstitutional. Republicans are now mostly on the President’s side, because the current President is a Republican, and because they have seen how the Administrative State has become a permanent and unaccountable fourth branch of government.
Of all the battles to which the Trump administration has given rise, this one may, in the end, be the most important.
The decision on this matter will determine whether or not we go back to the Republic our Founding Fathers created–do the checks and balances put in place in our Constitution still apply?




