The Supreme Court is steering us towards monarchy. No kings!

Later this year, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case that will decide whether President Donald Trump can fully reshape the executive branch in his own image. At issue is whether Federal Trade Commission member Rebecca Slaughter can be fired before her term ends only in cases of “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance of office,” as the law establishing the FTC states, or whether Trump can dismiss her at will, as he attempted in March. The conservative majority is all but certain to find he does have that power, regardless of what Congress or the court’s own precedents have to say on the matter. Trump v. Slaughter is but the latest in a string of cases before the court in which the administration seeks to free the president from the checks and balances that the country’s founders devised to prevent a king from arising in America. And yet, if you were to ask the court’s conservative justices about their judicial philosophy, most would at least nod toward originalism. That framework argues that the Constitution should be read and interpreted only as it was intended at the time of its drafting more than 200 years ago. And if the originalist justices’ interpretation of an 18th century document unerringly coincides with 21st century Republican ideology, even on issues the Founders never considered, why, that’s mere happenstance. On top of originalist ideology, Justice Samuel Alito and several of his colleagues also layer on a belief in the so-called unitary executive. And while Chief Justice John Roberts may not identify as an originalist, he, too, has embraced the unitary executive. The theory places extraordinary weight on Article II’s “vesting clause,” which states that “executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” As I wrote this year, the theory’s adherents believe that “every facet of the executive branch is necessarily an extension of that power, and the president must accordingly have complete control over all aspects of it.” Congress’ clear role under Article I in establishing the shape and functions of the executive branch — let alone the laws the executive is meant to execute— is treated as an afterthought. The Supreme Court's chief originalists seem more like monarchists