New York Times reports Michele Beckwith’s firing came after she reminded Border Patrol to comply with courts

New York Times reports Michele Beckwith’s firing came after she reminded Border Patrol to comply with courts

Donald Trump fired a top federal prosecutor in Sacramento just hours after she warned immigration agents they could not indiscriminately detain people in her district, according to documents reviewed by the New York Times.

Michele Beckwith, who became the acting US attorney in Sacramento in January, received an email at 4.31pm on 15 July notifying her that the president had ordered her termination.

The day before, Beckwith had received a phone call from Gregory Bovino, who leads the Border Patrol’s unit in El Centro, a border city 600 miles south of Sacramento. Bovino was planning an immigration raid in Sacramento and asked Beckwith who in her office to contact if his officers were assaulted, the Times reported, citing Beckwith.

  • ctrl_alt_esc@lemmy.ml
    74·
    3 days ago

    What an idiotic system in which the president can just fire pretty much anyone. Gotta be a special kind of stupid to come up with this.

    • bear@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      77·
      3 days ago

      It’s even dumber than that. He’s firing people illegally, and then scotus comes in and and retroactively says it’s okay.

      • Typhoon@lemmy.ca
        41·
        3 days ago

        Or sometimes they say it’s definitely illegal but they’ll let it stand anyway.

        • dhork@lemmy.worldEnglish
          19·
          3 days ago

          SCOTUS will conveniently say “oopsie, I guess those firings were illegal after all”. In the meantime, those people are still fired, Trump still appointed replacements, and those replacements are now protected against being fired if somehow a Democrat accidentally wins the Presidency again…

          • kibiz0r@midwest.socialEnglish
            11·
            3 days ago

            protected against being fired if somehow a Democrat accidentally wins the Presidency again…

            Just as protected as they are right now. If there are no penalties for the firing, and the firing can’t be undone, then is it really illegal? The only thing keeping a Dem president from doing it is a desire to follow the law.

            • oyo@lemmy.zip
              14·
              3 days ago

              You’re overestimating this Supreme Court’s consistency. They would have no problem ruling the other way in an identical scenario.

        • FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca
          5·
          3 days ago

          It’s like watching a burglar, in midday, break into a bunch of houses and set them on fire, while the police and firefighters just stand there and say “that’s illegal”

    • WizardofFrobozz@lemmy.ca
      8·
      3 days ago

      He can’t. The people he is “firing” are straight up rolling over and allowing themselves to get fucked. At this point they deserve whatever they get.

    • mkwt@lemmy.world
      7·
      3 days ago

      This is the fringe legal theory called unitary executive becoming not so fringe at all. In fact it seems to be headed towards firmly mainstream, precedential status.

      Article II, section 1:

      The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

      Everyone used to think this sentence was pretty harmless. It was put in to say there’s one President at the top, instead of an executive committee (which was proposed and debates at the convention).

      But to the unitary executive theorists, that one sentence actually means that all of the executive Power must flow through the President, and there can be no executive Power that does not.

      The previous thinking is that this power was only talking about the powers specifically listed in Article II, which is not a lot. (Veto, cabinet nominations, pardons, and a few other things). And that if Congress chose to delegate part of its Article I power to the executive branch by passing a law, it could put whatever limitations, checks, and balances it wanted to.

        • mkwt@lemmy.world
          6·
          3 days ago

          It certainly seems to be going that way. If Trump can just choose not to spend money that Congress appropriated… Well, that’s a lot more power than even George III had when Thomas Jefferson wrote out that listicle of 28 reasons why he sucked.

    • MrVilliam@sh.itjust.works
      61·
      3 days ago

      And then the people gave this job to the “you’re fired” guy from TV and didn’t think he’d try to fire people. Twice.

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        5·
        3 days ago

        They only anticipated white land lords voting. But then again, that’s exactly who voted for this.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    12·
    3 days ago

    Our Supreme Clowncourt is the leg of the table that is truly broken.

    Obviously the demented rapist is broken.

    Midterms. Midterms. Midterms.

    Lefties, get your shit together Right. Now.