Wouldn't the Federal Marshals remove him? Who would give them the orders, though? How does the AG fit in here? Holder wouldn't give any such order.
This is perhaps the oddest thread I’ve ever seen on FR. Given some of the competition, that’s saying something.
Federal marshals presumably enforce a court order.
Who would have standing in a lawsuit to have the president arrested? Who would enforce it, and how, if the Secret Service resisted such an attempt, which they no doubt would?
It’s all really very simple. The Constitution precribes exactly how a President who fails sufficiently in his duties is to be removed from office. It’s called impeachment by the House, and conviction by the Senate.
Any other process is by definition unconstitutional. Of all the things the Founders were afraid of, a standing army and it misuse headed the list.
Yet on this thread a number of “conservatives” want to bypass the constitutional provision for removing the President and give that to some unelected General or Admiral.
Because doing if the constitutional way would be “too hard.” So by all means let’s ignore the Constitution and descend to banana republic military coup level.
Let me put it in very simple terms for everybody. The Courts have zero authority to have the president arrested while in office. The military has zero authority to detain, arrest or otherwise interfere with the President. In fact, their doing so is an oxymoron, since any authority they do have derives from him as Commander in Chief of the military.
There is one and only one way to constitutionally remove a sitting President. You could look it up.