Article II, Section 2, Clause 2.
2007-03-31 07:36:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The phrase "serves at the pleasure of the president" doesn't actually come from the Constitution. It stems from the statutory authority for the Justice Department.
In fact, there is nothing in the Constitution that authorizes the Justice Department to exist. Rather, the Constitution authorizes the Congress to make laws and the president to be the executive. After the Constitution was ratified and the government came into being as we understand it, the Congress passed a statute authorizing a Justice Department to be created and authorizing the President to appoint an Attorney General to head the department. The Congress retained the power to approve or disapprove of the President's choice for Attorney General (and some other positions in the Justice Department) but did not retain a veto over the President's firing of any of those people. Therefore, when making hiring decisions for those positions the President must consult with the United States Senate but not when firing people.
2007-03-31 15:39:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Scott 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
You wouldn't find that specifically in the Constitution, however, in Art. I, Sec. 8, the Constitution vests certain powers, such as the power to "Make rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces." to the Congress. Having said that, the specific laws regarding the "do's" and "do not's" of the Federal government are codified and can be found in the United States Code. The specific code governing this question can be found:
UNITED STATES CODE TITLE 28 PART 2 CHAP 35 SECTION 541
2007-03-31 20:09:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Gregory H 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's implied in the Article II powers for appointment.
Since the President can appoint people to office, that would be pretty useless if he can't get rid of the people already there.
2007-03-31 15:39:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its politics baby they can do what ever they want. ask the 92 attorneys that Clinton fired
2007-04-04 14:38:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by dnimrich 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It was exercised in an attempt to non-verbally intimidate other justices to bow down to our Bill of Rights-trampling administration.
This is probably the most unethical administration in the history of the US.
There's one example after another of how Bushies have broken the law. Dozens of them in fact.
2007-03-31 15:30:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
3⤋
Political appointments, they are not hired but appointed, the appointment was rescinded.
2007-03-31 14:50:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by rmagedon 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Executive banch part.
2007-03-31 15:04:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by greg s 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1
See for yourself.
2007-03-31 15:46:59
·
answer #9
·
answered by ally_oop_64 4
·
0⤊
0⤋