Legal scholar Caleb Nelson is worried about the “pro-president” direction the Supreme Court seems to be moving toward.
A former law clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas has warned that the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Constitution “appears to be moving toward a sweepingly pro-president position.”, originalist legal scholar and University of Virginia School of Law professor Caleb Nelson argued that the Constitution ’s text and historical context give Congress wide latitude to organize the executive branch and to impose limits on the president’s power to remove officials.
It’s an issue that is already front and center on the court’s docket, and one that Nelson warns “can do lasting damage to our norms and institutions” in the case of “a President bent on vengeful, destructive and lawless behavior.”The Court will hear arguments in the case in December, when it will consider whether to overturn the 1935 precedent that limits the president’s ability to remove independent agency regulators over policy disagreements. “It is true that Article II vests the executive power in the President,” Nelson, who clerked for Thomas from 1994 to 1995, wrote in his article. “But Congress is in charge of creating offices within the executive branch, and the Constitution does not give the President unilateral power to dictate who will fill those offices or what their authorities and duties will be.”since the president returned to office in January, Nelson hopes “the Justices will not act as if their hands are tied and they cannot consider any consequences of the interpretations that they choose” when deciding cases like Slaughter’s.“There is little question that the court will side with the president. Its conservative majority has repeatedly signaled that it plans to adopt the ‘unitary executive theory,’ which says the original understanding of the Constitution demands letting the president remove executive branch officials as he sees fit.”constitutional law scholar and professor William Baude’s immediate reaction to Nelson’s commentary. “Caleb Nelson, one of the most respected originalist scholars in the country, comes out against the unitary executive interpretation of Article II,” he wrote. Nelson’s originalist understanding of the Constitution has led to his opinions previously being cited in more than a dozen Supreme Court decisions. Thomas himselfsix times in a 2023 concurring opinion, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh named Nelson among a small group of “respected scholars” in a Article II of the U.S. Constitution states that “he executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” The “unitary executive interpretation” referenced by Baude is based on the “unitary executive theory,” which holds that the president has sole authority over the executive branch, including the power to dismiss executive branch officials at will.“If most of what the federal government currently does on a daily basis is ‘executive,’ and if the President must have full control over each and every exercise of ‘executive’ power by the federal government , then the President has an enormous amount of power,” Nelson wrote. “If a highly respected originalist scholar like Professor Nelson, on whom the court relies frequently, denies that originalism supports the unitary executive theory,” NYU law professor Richard H. Pildes told“The current Supreme Court may likewise see itself as interpreting the Constitution for the ages, and perhaps some of the Justices take comfort in the idea that future Presidents will not all have the character of Donald Trump,” Nelson wrote. “But the future is not guaranteed; a President bent on vengeful, destructive, and lawless behavior can do lasting damage to our norms and institutions.”
Donald-J-Trump Clarence-Thomas Supreme-Court-Of-The-United-States Constitution Law
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Stakes are high for voting rights as Supreme Court again tackles Louisiana redistricting disputeLawrence Hurley is a senior Supreme Court reporter for NBC News.
Read more »
Trump’s tariffs are devastating farmers in some of Ohio’s reddest communities: Thomas SuddesThe now-Republican-run U.S. House’s roll-over-and-play-dead reaction to Donald Trump’s imposition of what amounts to martial law in some big U.S. cities is perilous to Americans’ (eroding) liberties in a country that needs real leadership, not low-brow entertainment, writes Thomas Suddes in his column today.
Read more »
Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court today: 'A little bit too personal and confrontational'The former justice who was the deciding vote on some of the Supreme Court's most consequential decisions talks about the Court today, and about his memoir, 'Life, Law & Liberty.'
Read more »
Alaska Supreme Court upholds dismissal of lawsuit challenging Yukon-Kuskokwim salmon managementThe state’s high court said that because the lawsuit didn’t challenge a specific policy, law or regulation, the case should be dismissed.
Read more »
All 10 Paul Thomas Anderson Movies, Ranked by IMDbRegina Hall and Chase Infiniti in One Battle After Another
Read more »
Scarlet Witch to Become the New Sorcerer Supreme in Marvel ComicsMarvel hints at Scarlet Witch's new role as Sorcerer Supreme, with the upcoming Sorcerer Supreme 1 launching in December 2025. The creative team includes Scarlet Witch's regular writer Steve Orlando and artist Bernard Chang.
Read more »