State of Maryland asks judge to declare Rosenstein acting attorney general (1 Viewer)

[Rexedgar]

State of Maryland asks judge to declare Rosenstein acting attorney general


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ju...re-rosenstein-acting-attorney-general-n935446

“The state of Maryland plans to ask a federal judge on Tuesday for an order declaring that Rod Rosenstein is the acting attorney general — not Matt Whitaker, who was appointed to that position last week after the forced resignation of Jeff Sessions.”



The White House lawyers have to have their hands full!

 

[NeverTrump]

State of Maryland asks judge to declare Rosenstein acting attorney general


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ju...re-rosenstein-acting-attorney-general-n935446

“The state of Maryland plans to ask a federal judge on Tuesday for an order declaring that Rod Rosenstein is the acting attorney general — not Matt Whitaker, who was appointed to that position last week after the forced resignation of Jeff Sessions.”



The White House lawyers have to have their hands full!

So we basically don't have a President at this point. Trump is better off in a straight jacket in a mental hospital.

 

[Acadia]

More vexatious lawsuits to block Trump from doing what he is Constitutionally permitted to do.

 

[SLC]

So some appointed judge should be doing a legally elected president's job. Right. :roll:

 

[Tanngrisnir]

More vexatious lawsuits to block Trump from doing what he is Constitutionally permitted to do.

Breaking the law is not constitutional.

You're welcome.

 

[Athanasius68]

Breaking the law is not constitutional.

You're welcome.

No law was broken. So Maryland is wasting everyone's time.
Glad to offer my assistance.

 

[Acadia]

Breaking the law is not constitutional.

You're welcome.

I'm not going to "thank you" as you implied, unless you provide a citation to support your assertion.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

No law was broken. So Maryland is wasting everyone's time.
Glad to offer my assistance.

Yawn. There are several excellent arguments that it was, coming from conservatives as hard right as Clarence Thomas, no less. It's nothing you'd be interested in.

Super happy I could help you out with that.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

I'm not going to "thank you" as you implied, unless you provide a citation to support your assertion.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/matthew-whitaker-jeff-sessions-replacement-illegal.html

 

[Athanasius68]

Yawn. There are several excellent arguments that it was, coming from conservatives as hard right as Clarence Thomas, no less. It's nothing you'd be interested in.

Super happy I could help you out with that.

And there were excellent arguments that it is quite legal.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

And there were excellent arguments that it is quite legal.

Really? Cite them. I'd love to hear.

 

[Hatuey]

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/matthew-whitaker-jeff-sessions-replacement-illegal.html

You don't actually expect to have an argument where your opponent responds with a well sourced argument and something other than complaining, about the source, the page, the text color, liberals, or Hillary, do you?

Lol, get serious. We know Republicans didn't care for the Biden rule that they chanted in when Obama was around. What makes you think they'd care what SCOTUS says?

Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.

 

[upsideguy]

And there were excellent arguments that it is quite legal.

Of course, that doesn't make it legal, it just makes it arguable....and, of course, there are excellent arguments that is isn't legal at all. This is why we have courts.

More vexatious lawsuits to block Trump from doing what he is Constitutionally permitted to do.

If that is true then this suit will be dismissed quickly. Apparently enough people believe its not true that they deemed it worthy of a lawsuit.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

You don't actually expect to have an argument where your opponent responds with a well sourced argument and something other than complaining, about the source, the page, the text color, liberals, or Hillary, do you?

Lol, get serious. We know Republicans didn't care for the Biden rule that they chanted in when Obama was around. What makes you think they'd care what SCOTUS says?

Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.

Nah, I actually don't. Responding to them is essentially a futile exercise in the Socratic Method; something they're quite immune to, it would appear.

 

[Athanasius68]

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/matthew-whitaker-jeff-sessions-replacement-illegal.html

1. The Constitution permits recess appointments. A person appointed in such a situation has full authority of his or her office without Senate confirmation. So the idea that the Constitution bans unconfirmed individuals as heads of departments isnt true.

2. Sec 508 speaks of the attorney general "may" appoint a temporary placeholder, and gave a a few titles. It doesnt say 'must.' Nor does the attorney general have the final say who is named as the successor: that authority belongs to the president alone. And since there was no attorney general, 508 seems moot.

3. The Vacancy Act permits the president to name a senior person from the department. Whittaker fits the bill.

 

[SLC]

You don't actually expect to have an argument where your opponent responds with a well sourced argument and something other than complaining, about the source, the page, the text color, liberals, or Hillary, do you?

Lol, get serious. We know Republicans didn't care for the Biden rule that they chanted in when Obama was around. What makes you think they'd care what SCOTUS says?

Sent from Trump Plaza's basement using Putin's MacBook.

Oh we loved the Biden and the Reid rules it was the Democrats that were crying about them :lol:

 

[Chillfolks]

Really? Cite them. I'd love to hear.

If you read the article you sites it makes a he case that it was legal. The FRVA allows temporary appointments. The opinions it's not legal only reach that conclusion by ignoring the FRVA

 

[Roadvirus]

Ummmm...the state of Maryland nor a judge gets to decide who is appointed as US Attorney General. The President does.

Such a useless "lawsuit".

 

[dcsports]

Ummmm...the state of Maryland nor a judge gets to decide who is appointed as US Attorney General. The President does.

Such a useless "lawsuit".

Absolutely. It should be tossed for standing. How is Maryland impacted by an acting AG?

 

[jmotivator]

So we basically don't have a President at this point. Trump is better off in a straight jacket in a mental hospital.

No, we have a bunch of nincompoops who can't seem to grasp that the power to appoint an acting AG resides entirely with the office of President.

When there is a full appointment to be the new AG the state of Maryland will have two votes to have their say like every other state.

 

[apdst]

State of Maryland asks judge to declare Rosenstein acting attorney general


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ju...re-rosenstein-acting-attorney-general-n935446

“The state of Maryland plans to ask a federal judge on Tuesday for an order declaring that Rod Rosenstein is the acting attorney general — not Matt Whitaker, who was appointed to that position last week after the forced resignation of Jeff Sessions.”



The White House lawyers have to have their hands full!

The Judicial Branch can't change The Constitution.

 

[apdst]

So we basically don't have a President at this point. Trump is better off in a straight jacket in a mental hospital.

Actually, there are a bunch of anti-Trump retards that don't understand the law.

The law doesn't say the DAG "will" fill in for the AG. It says the DAG "may" fill in for the AG.

 

[apdst]

Breaking the law is not constitutional.

You're welcome.

What law is he breaking? Be sure and post supporting text.

 

[Atomic Kid]

And there were excellent arguments that it is quite legal.

No there isn't. In addition to the Constitution's appointment clause the DOJ has it own specific statute for succession.

28 USC Section 508 - (a) In case of a vacancy in the office of Attorney General, or of his absence or disability, the Deputy Attorney General may exercise all the duties of that office, and for the purpose of section 3345 of title 5 the Deputy Attorney General is the first assistant to the Attorney General.

(b) When by reason of absence, disability, or vacancy in office, neither the Attorney General nor the Deputy Attorney General is available to exercise the duties of the office of Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General shall act as Attorney General. The Attorney General may designate the Solicitor General and the Assistant Attorneys General, in further order of succession, to act as Attorney General.

 

[dcsports]

No, we have a bunch of nincompoops who can't seem to grasp that the power to appoint an acting AG resides entirely with the office of President.

When there is a full appointment to be the new AG the state of Maryland will have two votes to have their say like every other state.

Absolutely. Trump will appoint a new AG... likely before the end of the year. (I would be surprised if they didn't already have a short list.) The background check will get rolling, and he/she will be confirmed by the incoming senate as soon as January.

I kind of doubt Whitaker will do anything on the Mueller front, beyond possibly providing a report and a plan for a transition.