Many of those things will be litigated, and some may be overturned. That happens to administrations all the time. That is checks and balances. But federal emplo

Many of those things will be litigated, and some may be overturned. That happens to administrations all the time. That is checks and balances. But federal employees are not at liberty to ignore directives from the President because they don’t think it’s “sound policy.” Nobody voted for them. You’re talking about unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats short-circuiting the operation of the democratically accountable branches. By the way I’d give the same courtesy to any president. His student loan forgiveness was obviously illegal, as well as being bad policy. But it would’ve been beyond the pale for his Department of Education to ignore the directive. > The executive 'executes' the rules and policies established by the legislative branch. Government employees execute those rules, the President oversees. Show me where it says anything like this in Article II: https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-i?gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAADJbFsC6xY0ANMsY7yevtSikE3pVg https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/art... Article II is crystal clear. The very first sentence says: “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” It’s parallel to the congressmen or Supreme Court justices. The “civil service” are just staff. The constitution doesn’t even bother mentioning them. What you’re saying is that there’s this key organ of government—the “non-political civil service”—with independent responsibilities exercising their best judgment, that somehow isn’t even mentioned in the constitution!