No. of Recommendations: 13
Heh. That's called playing chess. Well done, Sean.No it's not. There's never been any realistic dispute that the President can fire anyone that he's appointed, absent an express provision otherwise.
Here's the order dismissing Spicer's claims. The court never took seriously Spicer's suggestion that an appointed official could not be summarily fired by the President, and cited longstanding and uniform Supreme Court precedent on the issue. They dismissed his substantive argument in three pages, mostly just filled with all the courts that have already addressed this issue - including a SCOTUS decision from just the prior year.
That isn't "playing chess" - it's getting your butt kicked in court because you've raised arguments that have been rejected for decades.
storage.courtlistener.com: PDF document
