Dr. Ronald Pestritto

The case of Humphrey's executor was about the question of whether or not Congress could create an agency like the FTC, but protect it from presidential control. And the way in which principally it is protected from presidential control is by the president not being allowed to remove the commissioners whenever he likes. And that was challenged in the 1930s.

The case of Humphrey's executor was about the question of whether or not Congress could create an agency like the FTC, but protect it from presidential control. And the way in which principally it is protected from presidential control is by the president not being allowed to remove the commissioners whenever he likes. And that was challenged in the 1930s.

FDR tried to remove Mr. Humphreys, who was a pre-New Deal commissioner. And the court came in and said, no, Congress can, uh, when it wants to create independence for these agencies, it can carve out a special zone of protection from presidential control. And of course the obvious problem with that is, well, uh, where are they if they're not in the executive branch?

FDR tried to remove Mr. Humphreys, who was a pre-New Deal commissioner. And the court came in and said, no, Congress can, uh, when it wants to create independence for these agencies, it can carve out a special zone of protection from presidential control. And of course the obvious problem with that is, well, uh, where are they if they're not in the executive branch?

The president has the executive power according to our constitution. And so if they're not controlled by the elected executive, then by whom are they controlled? And so for years, constitutionalists have really wanted to get the court to look anew at the Humphreys executive precedent. And the good news is it's pretty clear if you follow the jurisprudence over the last several years,

The president has the executive power according to our constitution. And so if they're not controlled by the elected executive, then by whom are they controlled? And so for years, constitutionalists have really wanted to get the court to look anew at the Humphreys executive precedent. And the good news is it's pretty clear if you follow the jurisprudence over the last several years,

the court is pretty sympathetic with the so-called unitary understanding of the executive that I'm describing, that the president has this power under Article II. You can't limit his removal of executive branch officials this way.

the court is pretty sympathetic with the so-called unitary understanding of the executive that I'm describing, that the president has this power under Article II. You can't limit his removal of executive branch officials this way.

Humphrey's executor, I've said many times, perhaps other than Dred Scott, is probably the worst decision in the history of the Supreme Court in terms of its historical ignorance and constitutional incompetence. So I think there's going to be a sympathetic audience, quite frankly, at the Supreme Court. They've gone just up to the edge in thinking about repealing Humphreys in the past.

Humphrey's executor, I've said many times, perhaps other than Dred Scott, is probably the worst decision in the history of the Supreme Court in terms of its historical ignorance and constitutional incompetence. So I think there's going to be a sympathetic audience, quite frankly, at the Supreme Court. They've gone just up to the edge in thinking about repealing Humphreys in the past.

And the Trump administration, they clearly know that. And so they are trying to tee this up as best they can, where even the more incrementalist justices on the court, they're going to have a hard time evading the issue, I think.

And the Trump administration, they clearly know that. And so they are trying to tee this up as best they can, where even the more incrementalist justices on the court, they're going to have a hard time evading the issue, I think.

Well, the book chronicles how we got to the place that that we currently are. So people might wonder, you know, we were we were talking about the the FTC and the Humphreys executive decision. People might wonder, well, why is it that Congress would have wanted to kind of wall off an agency and protect it and apparently make it make it unaccountable.

Well, the book chronicles how we got to the place that that we currently are. So people might wonder, you know, we were we were talking about the the FTC and the Humphreys executive decision. People might wonder, well, why is it that Congress would have wanted to kind of wall off an agency and protect it and apparently make it make it unaccountable.

And the story of how that happened and what an incredible departure that is from the original Republican vision of our founders really goes through the progressive era, the original progressive era, back to the likes of Woodrow Wilson, especially, and also folks like like Teddy Roosevelt.

And the story of how that happened and what an incredible departure that is from the original Republican vision of our founders really goes through the progressive era, the original progressive era, back to the likes of Woodrow Wilson, especially, and also folks like like Teddy Roosevelt.

And so what I try to do in the book is to say, all right, all of this, all of these developments today, these rogue agencies, the fact that you have hundreds of thousands of people governing us and they go on doing it regardless of election, elections come and go and the administrative state just sort of chugs on. Well, that didn't just happen. It wasn't just in the last five years or 10 years.

And so what I try to do in the book is to say, all right, all of this, all of these developments today, these rogue agencies, the fact that you have hundreds of thousands of people governing us and they go on doing it regardless of election, elections come and go and the administrative state just sort of chugs on. Well, that didn't just happen. It wasn't just in the last five years or 10 years.

It's been a project underway in this country for a hundred years. It goes back even into the end of the 19th century. And so the book basically traces the very different arguments about the purpose of government, the great critique of the Constitution, the progressive argument that

It's been a project underway in this country for a hundred years. It goes back even into the end of the 19th century. And so the book basically traces the very different arguments about the purpose of government, the great critique of the Constitution, the progressive argument that