On Monday, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas Legality of the Special Counsel’s Appointment In two federal lawsuits against former President Donald Trump.
The court recently ruled that the president Absolute immunity for acts of public service There is no immunity for informal conduct, but the Supreme Court has left it to lower courts to decide what constitutes official conduct.
“Without a statute defining the position of special counsel, the special counsel cannot proceed with this prosecution.”
In a separate concurring opinion, Thomas questioned whether Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of special counsel Jack Smith was illegal because the position was not “established by law.”
“These questions must be answered before this case can move forward,” Thomas said.
He alleged that Garland “sought to appoint a private citizen as special counsel to prosecute a former president on behalf of the United States.”
“But I don’t know whether the special counsel position is ‘created by law,’ as the Constitution requires. By requiring Congress to create a federal position ‘by law,’ the Constitution places an important check on the president: he cannot create the position of his own volition,” Thomas continued. “Without a statute creating the position of special counsel, the president cannot move forward with this prosecution.”
“[A] “A private citizen cannot criminally indict someone, much less a former president,” he added. “If this unprecedented prosecution is to proceed, it must be done by someone duly authorized by the American people.”
Former Attorney General Ed Meese previously filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court arguing that Smith was unconstitutionally appointed. Fox News Digital report.
“Without the garb of federal authority, Smith is a modern-day emperor with no new clothes,” the brief states. “As an improperly appointed member, Smith is no more authorized to represent the United States before this Court than Bryce Harper, Taylor Swift, or Jeff Bezos.”
Garland argued that Smith was appointed by statutory authority, but Meese argued that this “confers no remote authority.”[]”The Attorney General appoints a private citizen to be granted special criminal law enforcement powers under the title of Special Counsel.”
Justice Thomas echoed the same argument in his opinion, writing, “It is difficult to see how the Special Counsel could have a constitutionally mandated ‘statutorily established’ position. When the Attorney General appointed the Special Counsel, he failed to identify a statute that expressly created such a position.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censorship and sign up for our newsletter to get stories like this directly to your inbox. Register here!
