“I read the entire article. Maybe I’m dense, but I failed to connect anything in the article to Mueller.”
The Supreme Court’s decision could back the argument that a special counsel must be nominated by the president and then confirmation by Congress, which was not done. This means an argument could be made for the Supreme Court to invalidate the special counsel law and the current special counsel because he was neither nominated by the president nor confirmed by the Senate.
Good news.
OK, thanks!
The exact same logic was used when Obamacare come to the Supreme court. Obama admitted it was a tax and tax bills must originate in the House according to the old constitution we used to use.
The Supremes simply said, “yeah, it’s an unconstitutional tax after all, but that’s cool with us”.
Good news.
*********************
It’s good news, indeed. And you’re right ... if a lowly SEC ALJ is considered to necessarily fall under the Constitution’s Appointments clause, than a “Special Counsel” who presumes to have the authority to name Acting Assistant United States Attorneys to work for him sure as Hell falls under the Appointments Clause. And surprise, surprise, surprise... Mueller was not appointed by the President. Interesting times!