An individual allegedly involved in a thwarted terrorist attack aimed at Sunday’s UFC Freedom 250 event at the White House parroted Democrat conspiracy theories about President Trump protecting child predators connected to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, according to federal court documents. The revelation came on Tuesday, when Fox News reported on how the FBI and […]
In Trump v. Slaughter — a case that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court — President Donald Trump is defending his right to fire Rebecca Slaughter, a former commissioner for the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The case is pending, and according to Reason's Damon Root, he may have the late Justice Antonin Scalia to thank if Trump v. Slaughter goes his way."Sometime in the next two or three weeks," Root explains in the libertarian Reason, "the U.S. Supreme Court will decide a case about the president's authority to fire independent federal agency heads 'at will,' rather than 'for cause,' as federal law currently requires. If President Donald Trump wins the case, as many legal observers think he probably will, a 1988 dissenting opinion by a famous conservative justice is likely to play a key supporting role."The 1988 dissent by Scalia was in the case Morrison v. Olson.In that ruling 38 years ago, Chief Justice William Rehnquist and eight other justices examined a president's ability to remove officers of the U.S. from office. Scalia was the lone dissenter, disagreeing with two fellow Ronald Reagan appointees — Justices Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O'Connor — as well as Rehnquist and Justices Thurgood Marshall, Byron White, Harry Blackmun, John Paul Stevens and William Brennan Jr."According to the Federal Trade Commission Act," Root notes, "FTC commissioners may only 'be removed by the President for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.' Trump, however, purported to fire Slaughter for purely political reasons, which the statute, as written, does not allow. The question now before the Supreme Court is whether that statutory requirement amounts to an unlawful restriction on executive power. A majority of the Supreme Court seems inclined to view the law in that unforgiving light and rule in Trump's favor."Root continues, "If the Court does so, among the legal authorities it is likely to cite is a solo dissent written by the late Justice Antonin Scalia in a case called Morrison v. Olson (1988)…. At issue in Morrison v. Olson was whether the existence of the independent counsel violated the constitutional separation of powers because it placed certain executive authorities beyond the immediate reach of the chief executive."Morrison v. Olson, like Trump v. Slaughter 38 years later, is grappling with how much executive power a president enjoys under the Constitution. "Writing for the majority, Chief Justice William Rehnquist, a judicial conservative who was first appointed to SCOTUS by none other than (President Richard) Nixon, readily affirmed the independent counsel law…. Writing alone in dissent, Scalia offered a very different view of the matter," according to Root. "The Constitution placed the executive power in the hands of the president alone, Scalia argued, and 'this does not mean some of the executive power, but all of the executive power'…. If Trump does prevail in his efforts to fire Slaughter from the FTC, don't be surprised when the long shadow cast by Scalia's nearly 40-year-old dissent is visible in the Court's decision."
Last week, the Supreme Court handed an unusual — if temporary — victory to an Alabama man on death row. As Steve Vladeck, a Georgetown law professor, writes, this is the first time in over five years that this Court refused to “un-block an execution that a lower court had put on hold,” at least […]
ATLANTA – The winner of Tuesday’s Republican Senate runoff race in the Peach State will face Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff in November. The contest is considered one of the most competitive Senate races in the country and could play a significant role in determining control of the U.S. Senate. President Trump endorsed Rep. Mike Collins…
The U.S. The post SUPREME COURT Rejects Carter Page’s Last-Ditch Effort to Hold James Comey and His FBI Cronies Accountable for Russia Hoax FISA Surveillance Abuse appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
The Supreme Court rejected former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page’s attempt to revive a lawsuit against former FBI Director James Comey and others over their roles in a federal investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The Justice Department in April agreed to pay Mr. Page, a former adviser to President Trump’s 2016 campaign, $1.25 million to settle other claims.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Monday that the Department of Justice has opened an investigation into him.Why it matters: Newsom alleged in a video that the DOJ is going after him at President Trump's direction because he's "considering running for president."The big picture: The apparent probe would be the latest example of a political adversary of the president alleging that Trump has "weaponized" the DOJ to target his enemies. What they're saying: "In recent days, federal agents have knocked on the doors of family friends and former employees," Newsom said in his statement."Not because they found a crime. Because they are simply trying to find one. They are demanding records. They are abusing the grand jury process. Digging through years and years of random documents."Donald Trump isn't just coming after me because of my mean Tweets.""He's coming after me because I am considering running for President. Because he hates that I've consistently called him out – over and over again – for his lies and deceit.""Donald Trump is simply the most corrupt President in American history. He has turned the levers of government into his own personal power ministries to reward cronies and to try to jail his opponents. His personal attorney now runs the Department of Justice, which has repeatedly gone after his political enemies."The other side: The White House referred Axios to the Justice Department, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Context: Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche previously represented Trump in cases involving his retention of classified documents, his 2020 election interference case and his New York "hush money" case.Zoom in: Newsom said that the probe resembles investigations into Former FBI Director James Comey, NY Attorney General Leticia James and Sen. Adam Schiff.Prosecutors were unable to secure an indictment in James' case and a court dismissed one of the cases against Comey. Zoom out: Newsom is widely seen as one of the biggest heavyweights for the 2028 presidential election, alongside former Vice President Kamala Harris.He's gained real traction and engagement on social media for trolling the president by imitating Trump's signature posting style. Newsom also came out with a new book in February called "Young Man in a Hurry: A Memoir of Discovery," which was widely viewed as the first step to launching a campaign.Watch: Newsom tells Axios, "I'm used to Trump attacking me 24/7. 'New-scum,' the whole thing."Go deeper: Swear Trump's weaponization fund is dead to kill lawsuit, judge saysEditor's note: This story has been updated with additional details throughout.