SCOTUS IS NOW UNMISTAKENLY COMPLICIT. JOHN ROBERTS WAS ALLEGEDLY CONCERNED WITH HISTORY AND THE PRSETIGOUS IMAGE OF THE COURT EVEN IF NOT THE TRUE INTEGRITY OF IT, BUT HE HAS TRASHED IT ALL, AGAIN AND AGAIN. HISTORY WILL NOT BE KIND.
Courage and clarity. That's what MM provides. That's what's left to us serfs. A la Holden Caulfield, where do the decent people go during terror-time? Instead of saying '26 midterms, say 19 more months of intensifying terror-time before any new M of Congress - in theory -might, might be sworn in.
The fecking Supremes...one step forward — two steps backward...tortuous logic on upsetting *Humphreys Executor* but a carveout for the Federal Reserve. Unitary Executive Theory settled law now, no recourses to license authoritarianism now.
Dave. The huge news is as you point out the Supreme Court's effective overturn of Humphrey's Executor vs. the United States. I know a little about the case but my memory is very poor. I turned to the Gemini AI and queried it as to the possible effects. Here, verbatim is its answer:
~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Overturning Humphrey's Executor v. United States would have profound and far-reaching effects on the structure and functioning of the U.S. government, particularly regarding the independence of federal agencies.
Here's a breakdown of the key impacts:
1. Increased Presidential Power and Control over Independent Agencies:
* At-will removal of agency heads: The core of Humphrey's Executor (1935) is that Congress can limit the President's ability to remove heads of "quasi-legislative" or "quasi-judicial" independent agencies to "for-cause" reasons (e.g., inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance). Overturning this precedent would likely grant the President the power to fire such officials at will, for any reason, including policy disagreements.
* Loss of agency independence: Independent agencies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and potentially even the Federal Reserve, are designed to operate with a degree of insulation from political pressure to ensure their expertise-based functions are carried out impartially. If their leaders can be removed at will, their independence would be significantly eroded, making them more directly responsive to the President's policy agenda.
* Unitary executive theory: Overturning Humphrey's Executor would align with a broader view of the "unitary executive," which posits that all executive power is vested solely in the President, and therefore, the President should have complete control over all executive branch officials.
2. Politicization of Regulatory Functions:
* Impact on rulemaking and enforcement: Agencies with quasi-legislative (rulemaking) and quasi-judicial (adjudication) powers would be more susceptible to shifts in presidential administrations. New presidents could rapidly change the direction of these agencies by appointing new leadership, leading to potentially abrupt changes in regulations and enforcement priorities.
* Reduced expertise and stability: The idea behind independent agencies is that their multi-member boards, with staggered terms and "for-cause" removal protections, foster stability and allow for the development of deep expertise in complex areas. At-will removal could undermine this, leading to less consistent and potentially less effective regulation.
* Potential for chilling effects: Agency officials might become hesitant to make decisions that could be seen as contrary to the President's wishes, fearing dismissal.
3. Challenges to the Federal Reserve's Independence:
* While the Federal Reserve is a unique case, overturning Humphrey's Executor could open the door to challenges to its long-held independence, which is crucial for maintaining economic stability and controlling inflation. Legal scholars have noted that it would be difficult to justify retaining the Fed's removal protections while overturning the precedent for other agencies.
4. Shift in the Balance of Power:
* Overturning Humphrey's Executor would represent a significant shift of power from Congress (which created these agencies and their removal protections) to the Executive Branch. It would diminish Congress's ability to create independent bodies intended to act outside of direct presidential control.
5. Increased Litigation and Uncertainty:
* A reversal would undoubtedly lead to a wave of legal challenges regarding the scope of presidential removal power and the constitutional limits on Congress's ability to establish independent agencies. This could create significant uncertainty in various regulated industries.
In essence, overturning Humphrey's Executor would dramatically reshape the American administrative state, potentially leading to a more centralized and politically responsive federal bureaucracy, but at the cost of the intended independence and stability of key regulatory bodies."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So there it is, a potentially catastrophic reshuffle of power both within the executive branch and it and a compliant Congress. As my late elder sister would say, "bad news bongos."
Thanks MM, I am very sorry for the people of The United States of America, I have lived enough to be witness of what the communist Fidel Castro did in Cuba on 1959, and now in 2025 a fascist apprentice is making an E.O. (one after another, flood the zone) coup from power and the media treat him like an ordinary President and later then, will be to late, he is doing every thing on bad faith on purpose, he does not know nothing of nothing just make money taking ventage of the Presidency, he is shaping USA his way, American people did not deserve this fate, but they vote for it, resistance while we can, because all the Jan 6 mob is in power now and fear is every where
I've just been reading a history of the New Deal. The NLRB was established in 1935. The Fed was established in 1913 but had few resources or independence until the New Deal. What exactly makes the Fed more established than the NLRB?
SCOTUS IS NOW UNMISTAKENLY COMPLICIT. JOHN ROBERTS WAS ALLEGEDLY CONCERNED WITH HISTORY AND THE PRSETIGOUS IMAGE OF THE COURT EVEN IF NOT THE TRUE INTEGRITY OF IT, BUT HE HAS TRASHED IT ALL, AGAIN AND AGAIN. HISTORY WILL NOT BE KIND.
OH--thank you for the Cactus Blossoms
YES
Courage and clarity. That's what MM provides. That's what's left to us serfs. A la Holden Caulfield, where do the decent people go during terror-time? Instead of saying '26 midterms, say 19 more months of intensifying terror-time before any new M of Congress - in theory -might, might be sworn in.
The fecking Supremes...one step forward — two steps backward...tortuous logic on upsetting *Humphreys Executor* but a carveout for the Federal Reserve. Unitary Executive Theory settled law now, no recourses to license authoritarianism now.
This. Fucking. Court.
😢🤢🤮
Please stop putting photos of Trump in your Memo, it's bad enough just having to read about him.
Dave. The huge news is as you point out the Supreme Court's effective overturn of Humphrey's Executor vs. the United States. I know a little about the case but my memory is very poor. I turned to the Gemini AI and queried it as to the possible effects. Here, verbatim is its answer:
~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Overturning Humphrey's Executor v. United States would have profound and far-reaching effects on the structure and functioning of the U.S. government, particularly regarding the independence of federal agencies.
Here's a breakdown of the key impacts:
1. Increased Presidential Power and Control over Independent Agencies:
* At-will removal of agency heads: The core of Humphrey's Executor (1935) is that Congress can limit the President's ability to remove heads of "quasi-legislative" or "quasi-judicial" independent agencies to "for-cause" reasons (e.g., inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance). Overturning this precedent would likely grant the President the power to fire such officials at will, for any reason, including policy disagreements.
* Loss of agency independence: Independent agencies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and potentially even the Federal Reserve, are designed to operate with a degree of insulation from political pressure to ensure their expertise-based functions are carried out impartially. If their leaders can be removed at will, their independence would be significantly eroded, making them more directly responsive to the President's policy agenda.
* Unitary executive theory: Overturning Humphrey's Executor would align with a broader view of the "unitary executive," which posits that all executive power is vested solely in the President, and therefore, the President should have complete control over all executive branch officials.
2. Politicization of Regulatory Functions:
* Impact on rulemaking and enforcement: Agencies with quasi-legislative (rulemaking) and quasi-judicial (adjudication) powers would be more susceptible to shifts in presidential administrations. New presidents could rapidly change the direction of these agencies by appointing new leadership, leading to potentially abrupt changes in regulations and enforcement priorities.
* Reduced expertise and stability: The idea behind independent agencies is that their multi-member boards, with staggered terms and "for-cause" removal protections, foster stability and allow for the development of deep expertise in complex areas. At-will removal could undermine this, leading to less consistent and potentially less effective regulation.
* Potential for chilling effects: Agency officials might become hesitant to make decisions that could be seen as contrary to the President's wishes, fearing dismissal.
3. Challenges to the Federal Reserve's Independence:
* While the Federal Reserve is a unique case, overturning Humphrey's Executor could open the door to challenges to its long-held independence, which is crucial for maintaining economic stability and controlling inflation. Legal scholars have noted that it would be difficult to justify retaining the Fed's removal protections while overturning the precedent for other agencies.
4. Shift in the Balance of Power:
* Overturning Humphrey's Executor would represent a significant shift of power from Congress (which created these agencies and their removal protections) to the Executive Branch. It would diminish Congress's ability to create independent bodies intended to act outside of direct presidential control.
5. Increased Litigation and Uncertainty:
* A reversal would undoubtedly lead to a wave of legal challenges regarding the scope of presidential removal power and the constitutional limits on Congress's ability to establish independent agencies. This could create significant uncertainty in various regulated industries.
In essence, overturning Humphrey's Executor would dramatically reshape the American administrative state, potentially leading to a more centralized and politically responsive federal bureaucracy, but at the cost of the intended independence and stability of key regulatory bodies."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So there it is, a potentially catastrophic reshuffle of power both within the executive branch and it and a compliant Congress. As my late elder sister would say, "bad news bongos."
I do hope it “all works out”. Probably not in my lifetime...
Congress and the subpreme court just cut each others nuts off and handed them to Krasnov.
Thanks MM, I am very sorry for the people of The United States of America, I have lived enough to be witness of what the communist Fidel Castro did in Cuba on 1959, and now in 2025 a fascist apprentice is making an E.O. (one after another, flood the zone) coup from power and the media treat him like an ordinary President and later then, will be to late, he is doing every thing on bad faith on purpose, he does not know nothing of nothing just make money taking ventage of the Presidency, he is shaping USA his way, American people did not deserve this fate, but they vote for it, resistance while we can, because all the Jan 6 mob is in power now and fear is every where
Morning Memo is essential reading!‼️📢👊👊👊
I just feel so ill all the damn time.
I've just been reading a history of the New Deal. The NLRB was established in 1935. The Fed was established in 1913 but had few resources or independence until the New Deal. What exactly makes the Fed more established than the NLRB?
This was a Shadow
Docket ruling with the 3
liberal judges dissenting.
There will be more about
this down the road.
What a fing shock and why those Justasses aren’t being impeached is beyond me this country sucks and I hope it is destroyed soon