From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv
On Jun 29, 2026 at 9:09:27 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <
ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
Four opinions released, each with a different majority.
No shock that Roberts assigned himself the Cook opinion, and it turned
out as expected. No shock that Thomas called it hypocritical in
dissent, an opinion I share.
Roberts ruled that Trump cannot fire Cook because REASONS. He claimed
Trump's phony just cause firing failed to follow procedure. He didn't
like that Trump could treat a Governor of a Fed bank as an at will
employee, forgetting that in the other case, Trump could fire the commissioner of the FTC.
Firing agency heads at will is a negative power. It's literally not in
the Appointments Clause. Either, the Clause implies that the president
may fire an agency head at will or it does not. There's no exception to
find that Roberts is terrified that Trump remaking the Fed could plunge
the world into a deep receission while remaking the FTC is possibly less harmful.
Joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, Jackson
In a separate dissent, Alito wrote that the case never should have been
set for argument on the merits, that it should have been disposed of in
a brief order so the lower courts could have continued working on it.
The merits argument delayed the case nine months.
In Slaughter, Humphrey's Executor was overtuned, despite the nonsensical
Cook ruling. The law preventing the president from firing at will FTC commissioners is unconstitutional. Again, Roberts assigned himself the opinion, joined by the 5 other Republican-appointed justices.
Reminder: She had been appointed by Trump in his first term!
I see the Court has agreed to take up the AR-15 this fall. IrCOm wondering if Thomas and Alito agreed to let Roberts and Barrett go squishy on birthright citizenship and/or POTUS' firing authority in exchange for their commitment to finally take that up.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2