3 ms·

Please read Article II of the Constitution: https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/ https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/.

Please read Article II of the Constitution: https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/ https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/. OPM isn't an "institution." It's the HR department for the executive branch, which has a new CEO. And nothing is "happening behind the scenes" or "hidden." The guy who won the election literally had Musk camped out in Pennsylvania for the last week before the election promising to do this. And now he's tweeting everything he's doing in real time. And the the linked article--the fact that the official National Park Service has what calls itself a "Resistance team"--is exactly why Trump voters were excited at the prospect of Musk doing this. We cannot have a democracy if executive branch employees think they have license to "Resist" the elected President's agenda.

exceptione 2y ago
[flagged]
- rayiner 2y ago
  I truly do not understand what sentiment you're trying to convey. The article is literally from a Blusky group that calls itself the "Resistance team of the U.S. National Park Service." How can you possibly condone the existence of that? What kind of government do you think we have?
- cheaprentalyeti 2y ago
  As an "other" I'd like to point out that the OPM database was handed over to China on a silver platter in 2012 and noone was fired or otherwise disciplined and noone lost their pension. This likely outed everyone who was operationally covert during the time period covered by the database at that time, which was ~ 40 years. And noone cared then.
_DeadFred_ 2y ago
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) of 1946 contains the rule that prevents the U.S. executive branch from acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner. You can't just come in and 'arbitrarily' change things. That is the law of the land for 70 years, backed up by the Supreme Court (including against Trump during his last term). That law provides the stability that makes the USA number one in the world. Without that stability, there is no investment in business. There is no selling US bonds. There is not dollar as the world's reserve currency.
- rayiner 2y ago
  That’s not what the APA means at all. “Arbitrary and capricious” means basically irrational or illogical. Agencies can change their minds on a whim “just because” so long as they articulate a policy reason. This happened several times with net neutrality and was upheld each time. See also: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/502/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/502/ Also, the APA was enacted to protect private rights, not to restrict changes to the internal operation of the executive branch. There’s some bizarre cases that have allowed civil servant suits (Crane v. Napolitano) but the practice of that is fraught.
  - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
    Sorry, in the USA, we don't believe in a 'top down, just following orders' style system. In fact we've gone to war with lots of countries that loved that type of system. But you are halfway there. It was enacted to provide stability. You stated it clearly 'articulate a policy reason'. There is no policy reason why EVERY AG needs to be cleared out. There is no policy reason why a non-government employee is allowed to install hard drives. There is no policy reason why 1000 EPA staff are being threatened with firing. There is plenty of established case law regarding this. You can try defending it online. I'm awful at online communication, you will win. But Trump is going to lose in court, again. Which is why he is trying to move so fast in front of the coming court cases that it doesn't matter by the time ruling come down allowing him to bypass our nation's laws, rules, and Supreme Court rulings.
    - rayiner 2y ago
      A top-down, “just follow orders” system is exactly what we have within the executive branch. There isn’t even an “executive branch” in the constitution. It’s literally just “the President.” https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-ii?gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAADJbFsDIsImN_ogTcenpMvxVWkKGf https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/art... (“The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.”). Article II empowers the “President” with all the powers of the executive. If imposes all the obligations of the office on him personally. Everyone in the executive branch works for him. The APA was enacted to provide stability for members of the public affected by agency action. It wasn’t intended to govern the relationship between the President and executive branch employees. Among other things, the APA applies only to “agencies,” and the President is not an “agency” whose actions are reviewable under the statute: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17648124652753755136&q=franklin+v+massachusetts&hl=en&as_sdt=20006#p801 https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=176481246527537...

exceptione 2y ago

[flagged]

rayiner 2y ago
I truly do not understand what sentiment you're trying to convey. The article is literally from a Blusky group that calls itself the "Resistance team of the U.S. National Park Service." How can you possibly condone the existence of that? What kind of government do you think we have?
cheaprentalyeti 2y ago
As an "other" I'd like to point out that the OPM database was handed over to China on a silver platter in 2012 and noone was fired or otherwise disciplined and noone lost their pension. This likely outed everyone who was operationally covert during the time period covered by the database at that time, which was ~ 40 years. And noone cared then.

_DeadFred_ 2y ago

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) of 1946 contains the rule that prevents the U.S. executive branch from acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner. You can't just come in and 'arbitrarily' change things. That is the law of the land for 70 years, backed up by the Supreme Court (including against Trump during his last term). That law provides the stability that makes the USA number one in the world. Without that stability, there is no investment in business. There is no selling US bonds. There is not dollar as the world's reserve currency.

rayiner 2y ago
That’s not what the APA means at all. “Arbitrary and capricious” means basically irrational or illogical. Agencies can change their minds on a whim “just because” so long as they articulate a policy reason. This happened several times with net neutrality and was upheld each time. See also: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/502/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/556/502/ Also, the APA was enacted to protect private rights, not to restrict changes to the internal operation of the executive branch. There’s some bizarre cases that have allowed civil servant suits (Crane v. Napolitano) but the practice of that is fraught.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago
  Sorry, in the USA, we don't believe in a 'top down, just following orders' style system. In fact we've gone to war with lots of countries that loved that type of system. But you are halfway there. It was enacted to provide stability. You stated it clearly 'articulate a policy reason'. There is no policy reason why EVERY AG needs to be cleared out. There is no policy reason why a non-government employee is allowed to install hard drives. There is no policy reason why 1000 EPA staff are being threatened with firing. There is plenty of established case law regarding this. You can try defending it online. I'm awful at online communication, you will win. But Trump is going to lose in court, again. Which is why he is trying to move so fast in front of the coming court cases that it doesn't matter by the time ruling come down allowing him to bypass our nation's laws, rules, and Supreme Court rulings.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    A top-down, “just follow orders” system is exactly what we have within the executive branch. There isn’t even an “executive branch” in the constitution. It’s literally just “the President.” https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-ii?gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAADJbFsDIsImN_ogTcenpMvxVWkKGf https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/art... (“The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.”). Article II empowers the “President” with all the powers of the executive. If imposes all the obligations of the office on him personally. Everyone in the executive branch works for him. The APA was enacted to provide stability for members of the public affected by agency action. It wasn’t intended to govern the relationship between the President and executive branch employees. Among other things, the APA applies only to “agencies,” and the President is not an “agency” whose actions are reviewable under the statute: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17648124652753755136&q=franklin+v+massachusetts&hl=en&as_sdt=20006#p801 https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=176481246527537...