anons lawfag here
the schumer meltdown is NOT about abortion (look here not there) which is a fake and gay division issue MOST americans agree this is a person/religious issue which the govt should not regulate
anyway the REAL issue is related in some length here
The Constitution Of The United States took effect—a document that divided the US government into three co-equal parts called the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches—neither of whom were given supremacy over their co-equal branches—and all of three of which are directly accountable to the American people and no one else.
Under Article 1-Section 8 of this Constitution, this report explains, the Legislative Branch is given the power “To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States” and “ To make Rules for the Government”—a power the Legislative Branch used to create and fund numerous government departments and agencies used by the Executive Branch for the efficient management of their nation—but which 137-years after this Constitution came into effect, saw this entire process breaking down.
The breakdown of this Constitutional process, this report notes, centered on the control of the government departments and agencies created by the Legislative Branch (US Congress) but resided in the Executive Branch (the President)—a dispute solved by the US Supreme Court in the 1926 case called Myers v. United States—a case decided in a 70-page ruling written by Chief Justice William Howard Taft, about which is said:
Taft’s lengthy opinion in Myers concluded that constitutional structure and separation of powers principles made the president’s removal power regarding officers exercising executive power “illimitable.”
“From the division” of powers into three branches, Taft wrote, “the reasonable construction of the Constitution must be that the branches should be kept separate in all cases in which they were not expressly blended, and the Constitution should be expounded to blend them no more than it affirmatively requires.”
Taft understood that when an agency exercises executive power, such as by filing suit to enforce a federal consumer‐protection law, the officers of that agency are exercising the power vested by the Constitution in the president alone.
For that exercise of the president’s power to be constitutionally valid, the president must retain ultimate control over its use.
Ten years after the Myers v. United States case was decided and gave the President full control over his own Executive Branch, this report continues, the United States was in the grip of the Great Depression and being ruled over by its socialist Democrat Party leader President Franklin D. Roosevelt—who along with his totally controlled socialist Democrat Party controlled US Congress, “saw these progressive politicians wildest dreams come alive”—wild dreams that saw them creating what are called “FDR’s Alphabet Soup”—that describes the numerous government departments and agencies these socialists created—creations that became monstrous, however, in 1936 when an “under siege” United States Supreme Court decided a case forced on them by Roosevelt and his socialist Democrats called Humphrey’s Executor v. U.S.—the decision of which effectively gutted the Myers v. United States ruling issued just ten-years earlier, and that made government departments and agencies a separate power unto themselves not accountable to any branch of government or even the American voters—and about which the world renowned late US Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia scathingly wrote, in 1988, what history has now recorded as “The Great Dissent”:
One can hardly grieve for the shoddy treatment given today to Humphrey's Executor, which, after all, accorded the same indignity (with much less justification) to Chief Justice Taft's opinion 10 years earlier in Myers v. United States gutting, in six quick pages devoid of textual or historical precedent for the novel principle it set forth, a carefully researched and reasoned 70-page opinion.
It is in fact comforting to witness the reality that he who lives by the ipse dixit (dogmatic and unproven statement) dies by the ipse dixit.
But one must grieve for the Constitution.
ANONS ITS ALL ABOUT THE CFPB - COVER FOR DS AND ESP DEMRAT THEFT AND FRAUD SCOTUS WILL UNRAVEL SOON
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/seila-law-llc-v-consumer-financial-protection-bureau/