Federal commissions "hang in the balance." (Page 1/3) 82-T/A [At Work] OCT 06, 01:30 PM So, the new session of the Supreme Court starts today… and one of the things they’re eventually going to be deciding on is … well, I forgot what it’s called. But it’s in relation to President Trump being able to fire employees of Federal “commissions.” The interesting thing is that there is absolutely nothing within the U.S. Constitution that defines a Federal Commission. There’s nothing that grants the constitutionality of it either. Congress has created several commissions over the past ~100+ years, but technically, these commissions are being granted self-governance and self-governing authority. Trump’s argument is that this directly violates Article 2 of the Constitution which grants the execution of the government to the executive branch. There is a VERY good chance that if the Supreme Court rules in Trump’s favor, that it could set precedent for (or actually eliminating) the creation of these commissions (like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, FCC, etc.). I’m torn on this… I think it was a means of diverting some power from the presidency, but Congress needs to learn to do a better job… and not abdicate their authority to things like this. Not sure how I feel… but it could get really crazy in 2026. blackrams OCT 06, 01:41 PM quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: So, the new session of the Supreme Court starts today… and one of the things they’re eventually going to be deciding on is … well, I forgot what it’s called. But it’s in relation to President Trump being able to fire employees of Federal “commissions.” The interesting thing is that there is absolutely nothing within the U.S. Constitution that defines a Federal Commission. There’s nothing that grants the constitutionality of it either. Congress has created several commissions over the past ~100+ years, but technically, these commissions are being granted self-governance and self-governing authority. Trump’s argument is that this directly violates Article 2 of the Constitution which grants the execution of the government to the executive branch. There is a VERY good chance that if the Supreme Court rules in Trump’s favor, that it could set precedent for (or actually eliminating) the creation of these commissions (like the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, FCC, etc.). I’m torn on this… I think it was a means of diverting some power from the presidency, but Congress needs to learn to do a better job… and not abdicate their authority to things like this. Not sure how I feel… but it could get really crazy in 2026. No idea how SCOTUS will side on this but, my concern is that a future POTUS will take us 180 degrees in the advancements this President has and is trying to make happen. IOWs, be careful what you wish for, you might just get it. Rams cliffw OCT 06, 01:45 PM I was under the impression that commissions were created by the Executive Branch. I see no reason a commission can't be eliminated by the Executive Branch. Doug85GT OCT 06, 01:45 PM There are three branches of the government. All parts of the government must be in one of those branches. There is no such thing as an "independent" branch of government. If such a thing existed it would constitute a fourth branch of the government which is unconstitutional. Congress has gotten away with creating these independent branches because there has been no serious challenges to them. I see SCOTUS as having no choice in this matter. They cannot allow a fourth branch of government. They can either declare those branches unconstitutional and dissolve them or rule that they are actually part of one of the three enumerated branches. 82-T/A [At Work] OCT 06, 01:52 PM quote Originally posted by cliffw: I was under the impression that commissions were created by the Executive Branch. I see no reason a commission can't be eliminated by the Executive Branch. No, technically, all "formal" government departments and agencies must be created by Congress. There's some exception where the President can create a sub office (complete with logos and director), but I can't remember what the limitations are. Like... you can have the Department of the Interior, which then has many sub agencies like the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and like... Bureau of Land Managment... but then you can have a third tier "office" under the Department of Fish and Wildlife, something like the Office of Trout Preservation (or some **** , I can't remember)... in that case, the office is created by the President, but everything above that has to formally be created by Congress. The president just gets to nominate the leader of those organizations... but technically he has the authority to fire all of them (traditionally hte president has, but there have been a lot of non-constitutional injunctions). 82-T/A [At Work] OCT 06, 01:54 PM quote Originally posted by blackrams: No idea how SCOTUS will side on this but, my concern is that a future POTUS will take us 180 degrees in the advancements this President has and is trying to make happen. IOWs, be careful what you wish for, you might just get it. Rams This has always screwed the Democrats... like when they used the Nuclear Option in the Senate which no one had used before... and now it gets used every time. It's literally been used to create an effective super-majority in the Supreme Court, and gets used to pass almost all controversial budget bills. The list is endless... but yeah, it does return some authority to the President... but it's authority that Congress has abdicated and should not have. cliffw OCT 06, 01:54 PM quote Originally posted by Doug85GT: Congress has gotten away with creating these independent branches because there has been no serious challenges to them. The only commissions that Congress can create are internal commissions. Such as the ? Banking Commission, Intelligence Commission, Judicial Commission, etc. quote Originally posted by Doug85GT: But it’s in relation to President Trump being able to fire employees of Federal “commissions.” I think it is the insiders on the Commissions who are suing to stop their elimination. blackrams OCT 06, 02:08 PM quote Originally posted by Doug85GT: There are three branches of the government. All parts of the government must be in one of those branches. There is no such thing as an "independent" branch of government. If such a thing existed it would constitute a fourth branch of the government which is unconstitutional. Congress has gotten away with creating these independent branches because there has been no serious challenges to them. I see SCOTUS as having no choice in this matter. They cannot allow a fourth branch of government. They can either declare those branches unconstitutional and dissolve them or rule that they are actually part of one of the three enumerated branches. Feel free to enlighten me if I'm incorrect. These commissions were created by Congress by some bill(s) over time. Those bills were signed off by whoever was POTUS at the time. Those commissions were created by Congress because they deal with issues (science) our elected leadership is not qualified to judge or make intelligent/informed decisions on. But, similar to trying to drive a herd of cats, it's almost impossible to do if given the authority to regulate. Unfortunately, Congress and past Presidents didn't have the foresight to actually put those commissions under a specific control and gave some of them the ability to regulate versus advise. In the case of the Federal Reserve lady the President wants to de-throne, I'm not in agreement, she has not been found guilty, only accused. If found guilty, the gallows is always available. As previously stated, I'm not sure how SCOTUS will come down on this but, this is a path that must be navigated with care. Where will this lead us in the future? Rams cliffw OCT 06, 02:09 PM quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: No, technically, all "formal" government departments and agencies must be created by Congress. There's some exception where the President can create a sub office (complete with logos and director), but I can't remember what the limitations are. Like... you can have the Department of the Interior, which then has many sub agencies like the Department of Fish and Wildlife, and like... Bureau of Land Managment... but then you can have a third tier "office" under the Department of Fish and Wildlife, something like the Office of Trout Preservation (or some **** , I can't remember)... in that case, the office is created by the President, but everything above that has to formally be created by Congress. The president just gets to nominate the leader of those organizations... but technically he has the authority to fire all of them (traditionally hte president has, but there have been a lot of non-constitutional injunctions). Think about what you are implying. quote There's some exception where the President can create a sub office (complete with logos and director), but I can't remember what the limitations are. You seem to be implying that a President can adulterate a Congressional Commission. Congress makes laws, not policy. A President only signs a law or vetos it. This is an interesting post. I suppose/believe a President did not create the IRS. cliffw OCT 06, 02:14 PM quote Originally posted by blackrams: Where will this lead us in the future? Rams I think any commission should have "term limits" per say.