Washington – President Trump's lawyers have described the Supreme Court over the weekend on an “unprecedented attack on the separation of powers, which called immediate relief”.
They were upset because a federal judge in Washington had blocked the head of a whistleblower unit created by Congress in 1978 by the Congress in 1978 by the Congress.
The emergency room initially went to the highest judge John G. Roberts Jr.
It will mark the first time that the High Court is taking up a legal lawsuit by the new Trump government.
In a broader sense, the question of whether the president's authority can limit the authority to combat the government.
For more than a hundred years, Congress has been issuing laws that create independent agencies, such as the Federal Reserve, to regulate the money supply and the Securities and Exchange Commission to regulate Wall Street. It also created dozens of other semi-independent commissions and boards.
Conservatives argue that the constitution puts the entire executive power into the hands of the president, and they have rejected these independent agencies.
But this far -reaching dispute is probably not definitely or quickly included in front of the Supreme Court.
The emergency call this week is more of an opening. And the use of a quick procedure can undermine the prospects for a clear judgment.
When President Carter signed the Whistleblower Act, he said that the special consultant's new office would become an independent legal authority within the government.
It would “protect the rights of federal employees who violate the pipe of laws, including their superiors,” he said.
Last year, President Biden Hampton Dellinger appointed the five -year term specified in the law and was confirmed by the Senate.
On February 7, Trump's head of personnel Dellinger sent an email with a sending with an “ended, effectively immediately”.
Dellinger sued and argued that his shot was for no reason in the “silent disregard” of the law.
On Sunday, Trump's lawyers said that “serious questions of democratic legitimacy and the responsibility of the election” would serve if Dellinger was allowed to serve another or two weeks until the judge rules the legality of his release.
Trump has started his second term with aggressive claims of the executive power, and his lawyers are confident that the Supreme Court will probably agree to them, especially in disputes in which federal officials are involved.
Roberts said that the President, as managing director, had the authority to remove and replace civil servants who “” exercise “the executive power in his name.
Five years ago Roberts spoke for a 5-4 majority and a determination of consumer financing Protection office because the congress said that the head of the agency could not be removed by the President, except for the cause. According to the original law, political disagreement was not sufficient.
Roberts said the president was responsible for the executive department and included the control of the heads of the executive agencies.
This judgment, said Trump's lawyers, said that the temporary interim order of the judge to block Dellinger was clearly unconstitutional and “contradicts the precedent of this court”.
The US district judge Amy Berman Jackson noticed that Roberts quoted the office of special consultant in his opinion in 2020. He then said that the OSC had no authority to issue broad national regulations such as the consumer protection authority.
“The OSC only exerts limited responsibility to enforce certain rules for employers and employees of the federal government,” he wrote.
When Jackson had done the temporary injunction on February 12, she said that she would hold a hearing on February 26 and then made a judgment.
But Trump's lawyers immediately appealed against the US Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia. A 2-1 decision was made on Saturday evening, in which they refused to lift the order of the judge.
The judges Michelle Childs and Florence Pan, both bidges, said that temporary entry instructions are not appeal, since they are only in the short term and temporary. They dismissed the government's appeal for “lack of jurisdiction”.
The deviating judge Gregory Katsas, a Trump representative, said that the president's appeal should be granted. “The president is immune to facilities that direct the fulfillment of his official tasks,” he wrote.
On Sunday Sarah Harris, the Attorney General, sent a 35-page page Emergency call to the Supreme Court.
Roberts asked for an answer by Wednesday and suggested that the court were going to decide soon.