Trump Fires Acting Attorney General • Hacker News Board

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#51

Post by rayiner » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 4:22 AM UTC

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.

Hierarchical leadership doesn't work like that with attorneys. If Yates couldn't come up with a good faith argument for the legality of the order, she wasn't allowed to go into court and defend it, regardless of what her boss said. She could have countermanded the order and accepted the consequences (which she did), or she could have resigned.

Whether the order rises to that level I'm not sure. I think there are definitely some instances in how the order was applied that wouldn't have been defensible if pursued further. For example, I haven't heard a single cogent argument that it's legal to exclude permanent residents without individualized process.

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#52

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 4:25 AM UTC

whyileft wrote: post #42

rphlx wrote: post #38

Anyone in the private sector would be fired under similar conditions, except probably without an article in the NY times.

Considering it is illegal for companies to do what Trump ordered[0], I'm not sure that would be the best analogy. https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/nationalorigin.cfm

[deleted]

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#53

Post by hprotagonist » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 4:26 AM UTC

TenOhms wrote: post #43

hprotagonist wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 n…

Did Obama, Clinton, or Bush have an AG that willfully showed insubordination and encouraged it to their subordinates? I'm surprised her action didn't get more news coverage, well not really.

Did any of the three of them dash off a quick little EO with no warning or legal counsel?

And it's not insubordination to refuse to do something that you, the head lawyer for an entire nation, find to be illegal. It's doing your damn job.

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#54

Post by ssalazar » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 4:26 AM UTC

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.

The Nuremberg defense. Classic.

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#55

Post by lets-tryagain » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 4:26 AM UTC

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

He's grandstanding and its pathetic. No Sam, you are not that important.

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#56

Post by siidooloo » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 4:26 AM UTC

Daishiman wrote: post #49

Please, take two seconds to read the statement. There's third graders who literally have a better grasp of the English language than Trump.

The language in the letter is frankly childish and immature. Talking about betrayls and such just makes it seem like he thinks its still a TV show.

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#57

Post by siidooloo » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 4:29 AM UTC

TenOhms wrote: post #40

ouid wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Although the attorney general advises the president, the basic authority of the office is derived from Congress and the functions of the office are subject to congressional control. In addition, the attorney general is a member of the bar and therefore an officer of the court subject to the directives of the judicial branch." - http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Attorney+Gener...

What I find worrying is she ordered that the DOJ not support the President without any clear conviction that the law was unconstitutional, it smelled of an entirely politically motivated action not grounded in US law.

She said that she felt the order was illegal. Should she follow orders and obey something she thinks is illegal?

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#58

Post by probably_wrong » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 4:30 AM UTC

Daishiman wrote: post #49

Please, take two seconds to read the statement. There's third graders who literally have a better grasp of the English language than Trump.

Let's not fall into the trap of thinking that Trump is stupid. He may be a lot of things, but stupid people don't make it into the White House.

And speaking of people who may be smarter than we think: http://keithhennessey.com/2013/04/24/smarter/

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#59

Post by Spooky23 » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 4:32 AM UTC

ssalazar wrote: post #54

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.

The Nuremberg defense. Classic.

No. The Nuremberg defense is to sit there and do something unethical justifying your continued employment.

The ethical course is to resign.

Re: Trump Fires Acting Attorney General

#60

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 4:32 AM UTC

ssalazar wrote: post #54

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.

The Nuremberg defense. Classic.

[deleted]