101010.pl is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
101010.pl czyli najstarszy polski serwer Mastodon. Posiadamy wpisy do 2048 znaków.

Server stats:

506
active users

#articleii

0 posts0 participants0 posts today
Nonilex<p><a href="https://masto.ai/tags/SCOTUS" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>SCOTUS</span></a> in recent decades narrowed the reach of Humphrey's Executor but stopped short of overruling it. In a 2020 ruling that upheld Humphrey's, it said <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/ArticleII" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>ArticleII</span></a> gives the president the general power to remove heads of agencies at will, but that the Humphrey's Executor decision had carved out an exception that allowed for-cause removal protections for *certain multi-member, expert agencies*.</p><p>[2020 case was Seila Law LLC v CFPB. The June 29, 2020 decision was 5–4]</p><p><a href="https://masto.ai/tags/law" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>law</span></a> <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/ActivistCourt" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>ActivistCourt</span></a> <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/Trump" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Trump</span></a></p>
Nonilex<p>The <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/Constitution" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Constitution</span></a> set up a <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/SeparationOfPowers" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>SeparationOfPowers</span></a> among the federal government's <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/coequal" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>coequal</span></a> <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/executive" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>executive</span></a>, <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/legislative" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>legislative</span></a> &amp; <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/judicial" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>judicial</span></a> branches.</p><p>Proponents of a *conservative* legal doctrine called the "<a href="https://masto.ai/tags/UnitaryExecutive" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>UnitaryExecutive</span></a>" theory that envisions vast executive authority for a president portray Humphrey's as wrongly decided. They argue that <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/ArticleII" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>ArticleII</span></a> gives a president sole authority over the executive branch, including the power to fire heads of <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/independent" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>independent</span></a> agencies despite protections under <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/law" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>law</span></a>.</p><p><a href="https://masto.ai/tags/Trump" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Trump</span></a></p>
Nonilex<p>But legal scholars who found the rationales unconvincing said there is no principled reason for treating the <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/Fed" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Fed</span></a> differently than the <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/labor" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>labor</span></a> boards under a series of <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/SCOTUS" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>SCOTUS</span></a> rulings that have upheld for-cause protections for agencies.</p><p>"If the court carves out a special exception for the <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/FederalReserve" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>FederalReserve</span></a>, it will appear that the justices are not applying <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/ArticleII" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>ArticleII</span></a> but legislating from the bench &amp; substituting their personal policy preferences," said Christine Chabot.</p><p><a href="https://masto.ai/tags/Trump" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Trump</span></a> <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/ActivistCourt" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>ActivistCourt</span></a> <a href="https://masto.ai/tags/law" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>law</span></a></p>
Justin Gibson<p>While speaking at far-right Turning Point USA's Teen Student Action Summit event today, Trump falsely claimed that he has the Article II power to "do whatever I want as President." Despite Trump's dictatorial aspirations otherwise, Article II does NOT empower the "President" to do whatever they want. <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/trump" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Trump</span></a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/tpusa" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>TPUSA</span></a> <a href="https://mastodon.social/tags/articleii" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>ArticleII</span></a> <br> <a href="https://thinkprogress.org/trump-believes-the-constitution-gives-him-the-right-to-do-whatever-i-want-as-president-4018da3ed988/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank"><span class="invisible">https://</span><span class="ellipsis">thinkprogress.org/trump-believ</span><span class="invisible">es-the-constitution-gives-him-the-right-to-do-whatever-i-want-as-president-4018da3ed988/</span></a></p>