Former Attorney General Ed Meese has argued before the Supreme Court that it should reject special counsel Jack Smith’s requests because he was unconstitutionally appointed in the first place.
Meese, along with law professors Steven G. Calabresi and Gary S. Lawson, filed a friend-of-the-court brief Wednesday to make the case that Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of Smith, a private citizen, violates the Appointments. Clause of the Constitution.
“Without being vested with the authority of the federal government, Smith is a modern example of the naked emperor,” the brief states.
“By being incorrectly appointed, he has no more authority to represent the United States in this Court than Bryce Harper, Taylor Swift or Jeff Bezos,” they argued.
The brief was filed in response to Smith’s request for the court to expedite former President Donald Trump’s case by arguing presidential immunity for his actions on January 6, 2021, which are related to criminal charges brought by Smith.
Special Counsel Jack Smith speaks to the media about an indictment against former President Donald Trump on August 1, 2023, at a Department of Justice office in Washington. AP Former Attorney General Ed Meese testifies during a House Intelligence Committee hearing on the 9/11 legislation on August 11, 2004 in Washington, DC. Bloomberg News
Meese maintains that the “illegality” of Smith’s appointment is “sufficient to sink Smith’s petition, and the Court should deny review.”
Meese and company noted in the brief that Smith was appointed “to conduct the ongoing investigation into whether any person or entity [including former President Donald Trump] violated the law in connection with efforts to interfere with the legal transfer of power after the 2020 presidential election or the certification of the Electoral College vote held on or about January 6, 2021.”
While Garland cited legal authority for this appointment, Meese argues that “none of those statutes, nor any other statutory or constitutional provision, remotely authorized the Attorney General’s appointment of a private citizen to receive extraordinary criminal law enforcement powers.” under the title of Special Advisor.”
Former President Trump attends a campaign event in Waterloo, Iowa, December 19, 2023. REUTERS
“Second, even overlooking the absence of legal authority for the position, there is no law that specifically authorizes the Attorney General, rather than the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint such Special Counsel.” , wrote the former attorney general.
“Under the Appointments Clause, department heads may appoint lower officials only if Congress so mandates by law… and does so specifically enough to overcome a clear presumption in favor of presidential appointment and Senate confirmation. There is no such statute for the Special Prosecutor,” he added.
Trump supporters take over stands set up for the presidential inauguration as they protest at the Capitol in Washington, DC, on January 6, 2021. AFP via Getty Images
Meese, who was attorney general during former President Reagan’s administration, said: “The special counsel, if a valid official, is a senior (or principal) official and not an inferior official and therefore cannot be appointed.” by any means other than presidential appointment and senatorial appointment. confirmation regardless of what the statutes purport to say.”
Earlier this month, Smith asked the high court to decide Trump’s immunity claims in his case facing charges related to his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
Smith called for expedited consideration of the case to essentially have the high court assume jurisdiction before the lower federal courts have fully decided the matter.
Smith wants the court to expedite the claims in hopes of keeping Trump’s trial in Washington, D.C., scheduled to begin March 4, on track.
Categories: Trending
Source: vtt.edu.vn