DOJ Dismantles Unconstitutional Barriers Protecting Corrupt Administrative Judges

DOJ Dismantles Unconstitutional Barriers Protecting Corrupt Administrative “Judges”

Acting Solicitor General of the US Department of Justice (DOJ) Sarah Harris sent a letter to President Pro Tempore of the US Senate Charles Grassley on Thursday sharing the DOJ’s determination that removal restrictions for administrative law judges (ALJs) are unconstitutional and that the DOJ no longer intends to defend them in court.

The DOJ justified its finding based on the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB. The court in that case ruled that the president being “restricted in his ability to remove a principal [executive] officer, who is in turn restricted in his ability to remove an inferior [executive] officer,” violates the president’s ability to adhere to his constitutional obligation to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

DOJ Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle stated:

“Unelected and constitutionally unaccountable ALJs have exercised immense power for far too long. In accordance with Supreme Court precedent, the Department is restoring constitutional accountability so that Executive Branch officials answer to the President and to the people.”

ALJs are officials appointed by the heads of executive agencies and serve as the triers of law and fact for disputes concerning an agency’s law. Federal agencies are prohibited from removing their ALJs except “for good cause established and determined by the Merit Systems Protection Board [(MSPB)] on the record after opportunity for hearing before the Board.” Additionally, the members of the board serve seven-year terms and can only be removed by the president “for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”

Screen Shot 2025 02 22 at 11.45.55 AM

Screen Shot 2025 02 22 at 11.46.01 AM

DOWNLOAD DOCUMENT

 

The Association of Administrative Law Judges (AALJ) found the DOJ’s determination to be an unlawful overreach into the independence of the ALJs’ adjudication proceedings. Judge Som Ramrup stated: “Administrative law judges carry out the law and should be free from political pressures. They are not at-will employees. The DOJ can say that removal protections designed to shield ALJs are unconstitutional, but that is not supported by law.”

The AALJ has encouraged the president to remove policymakers and heads of executive agencies instead of ALJs so that the president can ensure that US laws are faithfully executed while also preserving judicial impartiality.

The DOJ’s determination follows MSPB chair Cathy Harris’s lawsuit against President Donald Trump for removing her without reason. Head of the Office of the Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger also filed a lawsuit against Trump for removing him without reason, asserting that he can be removed by the president only for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” After a federal district court sided with Dellinger and blocked Trump’s removal, Trump requested the Supreme Court vacate the district court’s order.

Leave your vote

3873711 points
More

Don’t Stop Here

More To Explore

Screen Shot 2025 03 22 at 5.58.03 PM

Kevin Walker Estate Exposes Judicial Fraud and Procedural Obstruction by Riverside Federal Court and Judge Jesus G. Bernal

The Kevin Walker Estate has taken decisive legal action against what it describes as judicial fraud, conspiracy, and obstruction of justice within the United States District Court, Central District of California, Eastern Division. Despite filing a Verified Notice of Judicial Fraud, the court has failed to acknowledge it, further solidifying allegations of intentional misconduct and procedural bad faith.

How a W-2 Functions as a Gift to Your Employer and Relates to Gift & Estate Taxation: EPISODE 27

How a W-2 Functions as a Gift to Your Employer and Relates to Gift & Estate Taxation: EPISODE 27

Many individuals are unaware that a W-2 form may function as an implied gift contract, classifying wages as voluntary transfers under IRS gift and estate tax rules. By signing a W-4, employees unknowingly authorize their earnings to be withheld and presumed as taxable income, potentially falling under estate and wealth transfer taxation per 26 U.S.C. § 2501 and § 2511. This article explores how W-2 wages align with Class 2 and Class 5 gift tax classifications, the silent trust relationship created by voluntary withholding, and how to rebut the presumption that earnings were gifted into the tax system. Understanding this hidden legal framework is essential for asserting proper tax classification and protecting your income.

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.

error: Content is protected !!