The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that removal protections for members of the Federal Trade Commission are unconstitutional and overturned a 90-year-old decision that allowed Congress to shield members of certain independent agencies from being fired by the president at will.
The decision from the high court expands the president’s power over many independent boards and commissions, which Congress had insulated from political pressure by saying their members could only be removed by the president for cause.
This is what I don’t understand either. John Roberts said:
Like, what? What sense does this make? Does this not objectively make it NOT independent? Does this not objectively destroy the separation of powers? Why is an independent agency accountable to the president? Aren’t they there to serve the people only and not one person in the white house? How are they exercising the “presidents power?” The president(very purposefully) is not supposed to have that power. They do. That’s… kinda the point. Isn’t that like the definition of an independent agency? I don’t understand what he’s even trying to say here.
The idea is that the president works with these people and can’t be forced to work with people who will not work with him. So the fix is for Congress to move these agencies back under the legislative branch instead of the executive branch, or you are just going to see more seesawing of people getting fired every 4-8 years even more than we currently have.
Reads like totalitarian propaganda.
Of course it makes no sense, it’s just a word salad to make it look like there’s some justification behind it, when in reality it’s just another step into autocracy.