To the editor: Support the position of the UC Berkeley Law Faculty Dean Erwin Chemerinsky on the protection of certain executives of the Federal Arbitrary Shoe Agency by the current president. However, I would like it to have been more direct by showing how to give such power to the President could cancel the important objectives and functions of particular agencies.
Chemerinsky pointed out that the current law establishes that department leaders can be disciplined, which includes termination. But that must be done due, in other words, with real reasons linked to work instead of the president's whims. The agencies that have already been affected by the illegal removals of President Trump include the National Board of Labor Relations, the Employment Opportunities Commission and the Federal Elections Commission.
Chemerinsky pointed out the Trump administration position that “even civil service protections dating from 1883 are unconstitutional.” For those who may not know what that means, it is simple: the protections of civil service ensure that government agencies only of qualified people are used by government agencies. They must approve certain evidence and a trial period before being considered qualified and permanent employees.
And, even when they are permanent, they can be disciplined and finished due to cause.
Civil Service Laws replaced the corrupt Booty System, where presidents used government jobs to reward their interests, friends and financial supporters. You can only imagine what that did to the United States and will do it again if we return back.
This has already begun, so be careful.
Michael Harvey Miller, Pasadena
The writer is a retired lawyer.
..
To the editor: Chemerinsky states that “administration depends on an extreme vision of presidential power known as the unitary executive theory, which aims that Congress cannot regulate the functioning of the government's executive branch in any way.”
Article I, Section 7 of the United States Constitution gives Congress the power to cancel a presidential veto. This seems to mean that Congress can “regulate” the executive branch.
Larry Keffer, Mission Hills
