Battle heats up over fired US attorneys
Congress is threatening contempt citations, while President Bush claims executive privilege.
from the July 11, 2007 edition
Page 2 of 3
US attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president, who can hire and fire them at will. However, Congressional panels since this spring have been probing last year's sudden dismissals. Lawmakers want to determine whether the White House ordered them to for reasons that might be deemed politically improper, such as an attempt to hurry prosecutions that could have hurt Democrats in last fall's elections.
As a legal matter, Bush's claim of executive privilege in this case faces difficulties, say experts.
Courts have held that the executive privilege does exist. But in the past, it has been applied to direct communications between the president and his top aides.
Claiming privilege for communications between White House officials and Cabinet counterparts at the Department of Justice may be more of a stretch. Nor does the president have any real power to prevent former employees such as Taylor or ex-White House counsel Harriet Miers from testifying.
"But it's hard to imagine that people who have been so loyal to the White House will go against the president's wishes," says Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond in Virginia.
However, it's hard to predict how the US Supreme Court might rule on the issue, if a case reaches that far. In general, the current court has come down on the side of executive power, say experts.
And if Congress does issue contempt citations for anyone in this matter, lawmakers' next step would be a criminal referral to Jeff Taylor, US attorney for the District of Columbia.
Mr. Taylor – a Bush appointee – would then have to decide how to pursue the matter.
RSS feed
