Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 498 posts

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#21

Post by ivl »

hueving wrote: post #13
ivl wrote: post #2

If I understand it right this is the first time an AG has been relieved for purely political reasons. If the AG doesn't think it's likely they'll win a defense, that usually doesn't cause an issue. As an edit: it probably wouldn't have been reasonable for her to put up an intentionally weak case, but if the order isn't able to stand up in court, then what? The major worry for me is Trump's seeking to punish anyone wh…

>The major worry for me is Trump's seeking to punish anyone who shows disloyalty. This shouldn't be surprising nor worrying. This is how hierarchical leadership works and it's fully expected that anyone under the President may be forced to do whatever the President wants. It's the entire reason there are 2 other branches of government.

I'm concerned we're going to see unprecedented levels of constitutional and legal violations from this particular executive branch. Checks and balances are great, but not when they happen after the fact. And no, the president is not elected dictator, there's a degree of insubordination allowed. It's not the first time an AG has said "we cannot fight this ruling, nor should we".

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#22

Post by yeukhon »

kristiandupont wrote: post #17
yeukhon wrote: post #7

Have I ever had a strong disagreement with my boss? Always. Every day. But did my boss fire me? No. But should my boss considered to fire me? Probably. Normally you don't fire someone from your cabinet even if you are just an acting member. You make the person to resign. I don't know the full story, but this goes to show Trump is truly an unique president. He doesn't care what people think of him. He's running the Wh…

>He doesn't care what people think of him. I don't know about that..

I guess you are right, I guess he doesn't care what his workers (people he hired for the jobs) think of him. He just cares about HAVING his audiences and his followers. He really doesn't care if they love him or adore him. He just wants the attention.

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#23

Post by cookiecaper »

ivl wrote: post #2

If I understand it right this is the first time an AG has been relieved for purely political reasons. If the AG doesn't think it's likely they'll win a defense, that usually doesn't cause an issue. As an edit: it probably wouldn't have been reasonable for her to put up an intentionally weak case, but if the order isn't able to stand up in court, then what? The major worry for me is Trump's seeking to punish anyone wh…

I don't understand your point. Trump has dismissed the acting AG for refusing to execute the laws. As far as I know, Ms. Yates's job as acting AG is to preside over the enforcement of the law, not to decide whether it is constitutional (there is a process for that, and Ms. Yates is not in a position to make that determination) nor to decide whether it is good policy (as she is neither a legislator nor the chief executive). Would Democrats be pleased to see the same latitude offered to Senator Sessions once he's installed?

Note this is not an instance of prosecutorial discretion. Ms. Yates is not refusing to prosecute people under the law; rather, she is instructing her subordinates to refrain from doing the necessary work that would allow the government fair representation during hearings on the law.

If she is unwilling to fulfill her job duties for personal reasons (and likewise instructs her subordinates to stop fulfilling theirs), the appropriate course of action is to resign, is it not? If she's unwilling to do that and wishes to make a spectacle of herself, wouldn't a dismissal be the expected resolution?

How is dismissing an acting AG who refuses to enforce the law "purely political" and not an expected, appropriate response to someone who has refused to execute the laws of the country they're supposed to represent? Does it make sense to allow an acting AG to remain in place after she intentionally and explicitly declines to recognize the president's authority to direct the executive branch?

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#24

Post by yeukhon »

Spooky23 wrote: post #15
yeukhon wrote: post #7

Have I ever had a strong disagreement with my boss? Always. Every day. But did my boss fire me? No. But should my boss considered to fire me? Probably. Normally you don't fire someone from your cabinet even if you are just an acting member. You make the person to resign. I don't know the full story, but this goes to show Trump is truly an unique president. He doesn't care what people think of him. He's running the Wh…

You serve at the pleasure of the political official. Forcing people to resign is more about saving the boss' face than the employee.

That was my point. You really don't fire someone in a political theater. You make people resign so both ends can walk away.

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#27

Post by davesque »

cookiecaper wrote: post #23
ivl wrote: post #2

If I understand it right this is the first time an AG has been relieved for purely political reasons. If the AG doesn't think it's likely they'll win a defense, that usually doesn't cause an issue. As an edit: it probably wouldn't have been reasonable for her to put up an intentionally weak case, but if the order isn't able to stand up in court, then what? The major worry for me is Trump's seeking to punish anyone wh…

I don't understand your point. Trump has dismissed the acting AG for refusing to execute the laws. As far as I know, Ms. Yates's job as acting AG is to preside over the enforcement of the law, not to decide whether it is constitutional (there is a process for that, and Ms. Yates is not in a position to make that determination) nor to decide whether it is good policy (as she is neither a legislator nor the chief execu…

According to her announcement, she seemed to believe that the order was unlawful. As she was the most important litigator in the land, I don't think it's as cut and dry as you say.

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#28

Post by hprotagonist »

Spooky23 wrote: post #12

I despise Trump, but I don't think it's it's acceptable for a civil servant to insert themselves into the news. If you're getting an unlawful or unethical order, you follow the process, suck it up or resign in protest. By going rogue and making yourself the story, you're attacking the office of the president. It's a bad idea, bad precedent and will have bad outcomes.

Bollocks. Presidents are not above the law; most of them don't need to have their nose rubbed in the carpet in order to learn that.

It is eminently clear that the muslim ban executive order was drafted, written, and released without any of the normal communication, forewarning, or legal reviews. The AG is 100% within their duties to the nation and the constitution to say that they will not enforce something of that nature.

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#30

Post by nether »

minimaxir wrote: post #25

From Sam Altman on Twitter: ".@SallyQYates, @ycombinator and many others would be delighted to give you a job and resources to continue your work defending American law." https://twitter.com/sama/status/826262739202908160

Most likely response: who the fuck is Ycombinator, and why on earth would I want to work there?
Post reply on HN