Weather 
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
An Obama-appointed judge blocked President Donald Trump from firing court-appointed U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington Roger Rogoff, ordering the Justice Department to recognize Rogoff as the rightful officeholder and restore his ability to serve.
“This is yet another ruling from an activist judge trying to thwart President Trump’s agenda and undermine his constitutional authority. U.S. attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President,” White House spokesperson Lauren Bis told Fox News Digital.
Judge Stanley Bastian, who was first nominated by Obama in 2013, issued a preliminary injunction reinstating Rogoff and barring the administration from treating him as having been lawfully removed. The ruling sets up a legal fight over whether a president can fire a U.S. attorney appointed by federal judges. A 1979 Justice Department opinion and a 2000 federal appeals court ruling both concluded that the president has that authority.
“We disagree with the decision and intend to seek an immediate stay and will appeal,” the DOJ Rapid Response account wrote.
TRUMP ADMIN FIRES US ATTORNEY IN SEATTLE MINUTES AFTER HE WAS APPOINTED
Some legal experts and conservative attorneys took to social media to sharply criticize the ruling, arguing it infringes on the president’s constitutional authority over the executive branch.
“Another lawless and dangerous ruling. Violating the separation of powers. By another Democrat activist judge. This time? Seattle Obama Judge Stanley Bastian,” wrote Article III founder and president Mike Davis.
“Democrat judges handpicked their own U.S. attorney. The President, through his attorney general, fired him. Under Article II of the Constitution, the President clearly has the executive power to fire Justice Department officials,” Davis added.
Davis also noted Bastian’s first name was misspelled in the order, missing the “e” in Stanley.
‘ROGUE’ OBAMA JUDGE’S SMACKDOWN OF TRUMP ELECTION RULES PROVOKES OMINOUS WARNING FROM WHITE HOUSE DEPUTY
“The Federal Judge misspelled his own name in his order. That’s how you know it’s quality legal work,” wrote one user.
“Now Judge Bastian created an unnecessary constitutional crisis by essentially ordering a coup at the Justice Department, by ordering the removal of the President’s pick and putting in Bastian’s judicial puppet. The Ninth Circuit must fix this. Or the Supreme Court will have to step in. Again,” Davis concluded.
“The President’s power to remove U.S. Attorneys must be unfettered consistent with Article II of the Constitution. Judge Stanley Bastian is wrong here to order Rogoff reinstated. I predict Judge Bastian will eventually be reversed, whether at the Ninth Circuit or by the Supreme Court,” said Oversight Project litigation vice president Jeff Clark.
WHITE HOUSE RIPS ‘ACTIVIST’ BIDEN JUDGE WHO UPENDED TRUMP BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP ORDER
“Judicial overreach, plain and simple. The judiciary does not get to run the Executive Branch. Period,” said Holtzman Vogel partner Brian Nieves.
In Myers v. United States (1926), which centered on President Woodrow Wilson’s firing of a postmaster without Senate consent, the Supreme Court ruled that the president generally has constitutional authority to remove executive branch officers.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
More recently, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel concluded in a 1979 opinion that the president’s statutory authority to remove “each United States attorney” also extends to prosecutors appointed by federal judges.
The case is the latest in a string of legal fights over President Trump’s U.S. attorney appointments, following similar disputes in New Jersey, Virginia and New York.
A similar dispute unfolded in New Jersey after the administration sought to keep Alina Habba leading the U.S. attorney’s office after her interim term ended. Federal courts ultimately rejected the administration’s effort to maintain her authority, although the judges’ original appointee, Desiree Grace, did not simply take over the office.
Rogoff’s case goes a step further, directly testing whether a president can remove a U.S. attorney appointed by federal judges under the statutory process for filling a vacancy.
Read the full article here
