Obama Judge Unfires Agency Head

[Moonglow]

I’m fairly certain he’s out of your league.

Indeed, I don't fuck the handicapped.

 

[Lastamender]

He likely will while adhering to the court ruling in the end.

When the courts decide in his favor, why not.

 

[Rigby5]

LOL....Sounds like a fox (Dellinger) was put in charge of the hen house and the dems want to make sure she stays there.

Does not really matter.
The point is that civil service protection to prevent cronyism and nepotism goes back to the Magna Charta, and is highly evil to try to evade.
I am not saying people cannot be fired, but that they require charges and a hearing where they can defend themselves.

That is one of the reasons I voted for Trump.
Biden had illegally extorted the firing of Shokin in the Ukraine, violating the civil service protections Shokin was supposed to have.

 

[Rigby5]

Another leftist hack judge overstepping her authority!

Wrong.
Whether a person should be fired or not, it has to be done according to civil service protection standards.
Otherwise, you have nepotism, cronyism, and all sorts of corruption.
Not just now, but from now on.

 

[Rigby5]

I observed it, and found it wanting.

The point is the law requires all civil servants to be charged with the reason for termination and have a hearing to be able to defend themselves.
That civil service protection law is NOT "wanting" at all and is absolutely necessary.

 

[Rigby5]

Democrats are such children. His side lost. There's a new sheriff who is getting rid of the old sheriff's corrupt deputies.

Accept it, and try again in 2026.

Please . . . run on undoing all that Trump is doing now, not some Trump lite version that you won't mean.

Wrong.
The law for civil service does NOT allow for that.
It is totally illegal and has been since the Magna Charta.

 

[Rigby5]

As was Biden or whoever they shoved in front of the left and crowned for the moment, yet you said nothing then. Shocking.

Wrong.
One of the main reasons I voted for Trump was when Biden violated civil service law to get Shokin fired in the Ukraine.

 

[BackAgain]

Some of them are covered by federal statutes that limit the president’s authority to dismiss them.

1. If this guy is such a “covered” individual, prove it.

2. The “law” which purports to limit the authority of the head of the executive branch to fire subordinates is questionable at best, Constitutionally.

So it seems perhaps a judge telling Trump that he is not above the law.

No. That’s not what it “seems” at all.

 

[Rigby5]

Any law that protects a head of a federal agency or it's sub-groups from being dismissed by the POTUS is bad law.

As such we are bound by our good common sense to ignore such laws.

That said, I know common sense is not a dem strong suit.

WRONG!
There is absolutely no way to ever have a republic without having civil service protections for employees.
That does not mean civil servants can't be terminated, but that you have to follow the rules, publish formal charges, have a formal hearing allowing for defense, etc.
What Trump and Musk are doing, is not legal in any republic except banana ones.

 

[Rigby5]

Fire him again. Defy this lawless judge who needs to be brought to heel. SCOTUS will need to put these liberal hacks in their place.

The judge is correct, and you have to follow civil service procedures to fire protected civil servants.
The SCOTUS will NOT agree with you at all.
You do not appear to understand how law works.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Some of them are covered by federal statutes that limit the president’s authority to dismiss them.

So it seems perhaps a judge telling Trump that he is not above the law.

Or the judge is making shit up because she thinks she's untouchable.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

WRONG!
There is absolutely no way to ever have a republic without having civil service protections for employees.
That does not mean civil servants can't be terminated, but that you have to follow the rules, publish formal charges, have a formal hearing allowing for defense, etc.
What Trump and Musk are doing, is not legal in any republic except banana ones.

Those protections cannot make an employee's job bullet proof. That will breed corruption, as we are seeing.

 

[Rigby5]

1. If this guy is such a “covered” individual, prove it.

2. The “law” which purports to limit the authority of the head of the executive branch to fire subordinates is questionable at best, Constitutionally.

No. That’s not what it “seems” at all.

The "proof" is the ruling by the judge that says the civil service protection was violated by his firing.

No one in their right mind would EVER "question" the need for civil service protection in any republic.
I can't believe you actually wrote this?
How could anyone want to allow nepotism, cronyism, etc., that we have been trying to combat against since the Magna Charta?
What you suggest, wholesale firings based on political beliefs, would be in total violation of the 1st amendment, and would force an armed rebellion.
I have never heard of anything not just wrong, but criminal.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

MSN

Trump asks Supreme Court to fire ethics chief as mass purge runs into legal roadblocks​

This time, the Big Orange Bopper, is asking permission.

Why can't people follow rules.

"Donald Trump’s administration is asking the Supreme Court for permission to fire an ethics chief as the president and Elon Musk move quickly to gut the federal workforce, including agency officials and watchdogs.

The top official at the independent U.S. agency that protects government whistleblowers and enforces ethics rules sued the administration this month after he received an email from the president simply stating that his role is “terminated, effective immediately.”

Chief of Office of Special, Hampton Dellinger, is trying to see what he can get away with in firing folks. The time he is trying the right way.

A lawsuit from Hampton Dellinger, who leads the Office of Special Counsel, is one of at least three legal challenges from government officials testing the president’s authority to oust the heads of independent agencies.

Dellinger’s case at the Supreme Court could serve as an early test of the new administration’s authority as the president and Musk signal their willingness to obliterate checks and balances and reject court orders that don’t align with their agenda.

​

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

The "proof" is the ruling by the judge that says the civil service protection was violated by his firing.

No one in their right mind would EVER "question" the need for civil service protection in any republic.
I can't believe you actually wrote this?
How could anyone want to allow nepotism, cronyism, etc., that we have been trying to combat against since the Magna Charta?
What you suggest, wholesale firings based on political beliefs, would be in total violation of the 1st amendment, and would force an armed rebellion.
I have never heard of anything not just wrong, but criminal.

You think those bureaucrats give us a shit if the People lose their jobs because of government policy decisions? When Obama shut down drilling in the Gulf of America, how many of these bureaucrats "resisted"? Not a single fucking one. Fuck them. I have zero sympathy for them.

 

[Oddball]

"At the pleasure of the president".

 

[Rigby5]

Or the judge is making shit up because she thinks she's untouchable.

Everyone knows there has always been civil service protection against the arbitrary firing of government employees.
If not, then candidates could use those 3 million jobs as bribes for votes and campaign contributions.
There always have been and need to be civil service protections of most federal positions.
The only ones normally up for grabs are the heads of agencies where they influence policy and would be expected to be based on voter results.

 

[Seymour Flops]

MSN

Trump asks Supreme Court to fire ethics chief as mass purge runs into legal roadblocks​

This time, the Big Orange Bopper, is asking permission.

Why can't people follow rules.

"Donald Trump’s administration is asking the Supreme Court for permission to fire an ethics chief as the president and Elon Musk move quickly to gut the federal workforce, including agency officials and watchdogs.

The top official at the independent U.S. agency that protects government whistleblowers and enforces ethics rules sued the administration this month after he received an email from the president simply stating that his role is “terminated, effective immediately.”

Chief of Office of Special, Hampton Dellinger, is trying to see what he can get away with in firing folks. The time he is trying the right way.

A lawsuit from Hampton Dellinger, who leads the Office of Special Counsel, is one of at least three legal challenges from government officials testing the president’s authority to oust the heads of independent agencies.

Dellinger’s case at the Supreme Court could serve as an early test of the new administration’s authority as the president and Musk signal their willingness to obliterate checks and balances and reject court orders that don’t align with their agenda.

​

There’s an “ethics chief?”

Was she in a coma during the Biden years?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

If only Biden had done it by the book

 

[Rigby5]

Those protections cannot make an employee's job bullet proof. That will breed corruption, as we are seeing.

Agreed there still are means by which anyone can be terminated, but it can't be arbitrary.
You have to prove the need for termination in a hearing.