Former Clarance Thomas law clerk warns Supremes becoming sweepingly pro-presidential

 Wiktoria Gucia  - A former law clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas has warned that the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Constitution “appears to be moving toward a sweepingly pro-president position.”

In an essay for the NYU Law Democracy Project, originalist legal scholar and University of Virginia School of Law professor Caleb Nelson argued that the Constitution’s text and historical context give Congress wide latitude to organize the executive branch and to impose limits on the president’s power to remove officials.

It’s an issue that is already front and center on the court’s docket, and one that Nelson warns “can do lasting damage to our norms and institutions” in the case of “a President bent on vengeful, destructive and lawless behavior.”

The Court will hear arguments in the case in December, when it will consider whether to overturn the 1935 precedent that limits the president’s ability to remove independent agency regulators over policy disagreements.

“It is true that Article II vests the executive power in the President,” Nelson, who clerked for Thomas from 1994 to 1995, wrote in his article. “But Congress is in charge of creating offices within the executive branch, and the Constitution does not give the President unilateral power to dictate who will fill those offices or what their authorities and duties will be.”