“Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, see Art. II, §1, cl. 1, he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf, subject to narrow exceptions recognized by our precedents, see Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 591 U. S.197, 215−218 (2020),” the Supreme Court’s decision said.
“The stay also reflects our judgment that the Government faces greater risk of harm from an order allowing are moved officer to continue exercising the executive power than a wrongfully removed officer faces from being unable to perform her statutory duty,” the Supreme Court said.
Supreme Court just said :
“Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the President, see Art. II, §1, cl. 1, he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf, subject to narrow exceptions recognized by our precedents, see Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 591 U. S.197, 215−218 (2020),” the Supreme Court’s decision said.
“The stay also reflects our judgment that the Government faces greater risk of harm from an order allowing are moved officer to continue exercising the executive power than a wrongfully removed officer faces from being unable to perform her statutory duty,” the Supreme Court said.
So they are going to argue he can't ?
Why is the removed official assumed to be female??