Seth Barrett Tillman: A Response To Jane Chong’s Reading the Office of Legal Counsel on Emoluments: Do Super-Rich Presidents Get a Pass?

Once this error is noticed, the rest of Chong’s analysis falls apart. Chong can point to other language in Hoyt using “emolument of office.” It is there, and she takes it to mean that “emolument” can be used in a context unrelated to “office” and other employment-like relationships. But she offers nothing akin to proof for that bold claim. It is conceivable that the Hoyt Court added “of office” language to “emolument” because it believed that there were “emoluments” which were unrelated to office, but it is also possible that the Hoyt Court thought all “emoluments” were tied to office-and-employment-type relationships. Without her initial misreading of Hoyt or any other substantial reason to believe the former, the rest of her analysis makes no sense.

Read the full text of Seth’s post.

Seth Barrett Tillman: A Response to Fonzone & Geltzer’s Can President Trump Just Leave Key Executive Branch Offices Unfilled?

In a recent post on Lawfare, Christopher Fonzone and Joshua A. Geltzer ask the question: “Is the persistent and deliberate failure to identify candidates [for appointed federal positions] not merely a sign of inept governance and deadlocked politics but also, at least in certain cases, a legal failing as well?” Their answer is basically: yes. Their position is worth pondering. I do think several of their arguments do not work, and several others are not well supported.

Read Seth’s entire post.

On and Off Balance

Here we are, a couple of days past the middle of the year, and almost eight months after the election of Donald Trump to the presidency … and I swear that the lunacy has not died down in the slightest, but is now ratcheted up to eleven, or even twelve. (Gratuitous Spinal Tap reference.) The classical five stages of grief are supposed to be denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance, but it’s clear at this point that the Hillary and Bernie partisans are stuck fast at the ‘anger’ stage and appear to be egging each other into higher, farther, deeper and more intense demonstrations of denial and anger. It’s almost … well, operatic. Like a spectacular ten-car pile-up on the interstate, one can’t even look away from the spectacle especially the spectacle of establishment news media personalities and institutions losing their freaking minds over Donald Trump.

Read more

The Apprentices

If anyone would like to discuss President Trump’s proposal for an expanded role for apprenticeship programs in America…and related broader issues of workforce training and skills development…this is the place.  Some useful links:

Trump’s remarks on signing the executive order

Text of the executive order

Comments by Ivanka Trump and Labor Secretary Alex Acosta

Existing Federal regulations re apprenticeship programs

(There are also state regulations)

Thoughts?

Seth Barrett Tillman: President Trump’s Reverse Merryman

Interesting thoughts from Seth:

Trump is doing what Taney did, but he is doing it to the courts. Absent his recent tweets, Trump might very well have won*** the travel ban case: an appeal from the Fourth Circuit’s decision to uphold the trial court’s grant of a preliminary injunction against the (modified) Executive Order. But Trump does not want to merely win. He wants to win Yuuge! He does not want to squeak out a narrow win by a divided court promising more time-consuming, after-the-fact, and morale-draining oversight in the future (e.g., where such future oversight might threaten lower level Executive Branch officers with individual liability).

Read the entire post.