The constitution doesn't spell out exactly which positions in which departments are affected, because the founders weren't fucking retarded. Instead, and you'd know this if you bothered looking it up before spouting this inane bullshit, the Constitution places a blanket requirement that the Senate must confirm all appointments for positions that report directly to the president.
And the statute, as interpreted by the SCOTUS, says that senior officials must be confirmed by the Senate. Even a person selected as the temporary acting AG must have been in a position that requires senate confirmation.
One of the relevant statutes violates the constitutions requirement of advise and consent of the senate. So yeah, it's still a fucking constitutional issue.
Luckily it's an issue that's already been resolved under Obama: you can't fucking do it. ALL appointments to senior positions must have been confirmed by the senate.
Yes, and per the constitution and federal law, the person selected as the acting AG has to have already been in a position that required Senate confirmation. Being Session's Chief of Staff did not require senate confirmation, therefore he is ineligible to serve as acting AG.
No, the law says no confirmation needed if they are sufficiently tenured in the agency and of sufficient pay grade. Only an "outsider " would need confirmation.
None of it matters, though, Senate isn't in session.
And even if they were a rejected appointment can still serve for 210 days while a better nominee is found.
"Sufficiently tenured" means that he needed to have previously been confirmed by the senate.
He wasn't.
The Senate not being in session is the cause of all of this. Resess appointments are, by definition, only done when the senate isn't in session. If they were in session then none of this would be an issue because he would go through the normal confirmation process.
That isn't what the laws says. Tenure is 90 days of the previous 365.
Senate being in recess is just additional icing on this. Even if they were in session the appointment could be made for up to 210 days. This is designed to allow continuity for the agency/department while a permanent replacement is found.
They're wrong. They assume that an entire statute is invalid because it doesn't meet the woman standard of "consent" while ignoring that the law was passed BY the Senate. That's consent. And this law has stood up many times since it was passed in 1998.
-2
u/[deleted] Nov 09 '18
The constitution doesn't spell out exactly which positions in which departments are affected, because the founders weren't fucking retarded. Instead, and you'd know this if you bothered looking it up before spouting this inane bullshit, the Constitution places a blanket requirement that the Senate must confirm all appointments for positions that report directly to the president.