The appointment of Jack Smith as special counsel is being
challenged as unconstitutional.
Former Attorney General Ed Meese and two constitutional scholars
argue that Smith lacks the authority to represent the United States in the Supreme Court due to his appointment violating the “Appointments Clause” of the Constitution.
They contend that only Congress can create federal offices, and Smith’s position has not been authorized by Congress. (Trending: Judge Announces Historic Ruling In Jeffrey Epstein Case)
They assert that Smith, if considered an “officer” with significant authority, should have been nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
The argument suggests that if accepted, it could lead to the dismissal of all of Smith’s prosecutions, including those against Donald Trump.
The amicus brief further argues, “Even if one somehow thinks that existing statutes authorize appointment of stand-alone special counsels with the full power of a U.S. Attorney, Smith was not properly appointed to such an ‘office.’”
“Improperly appointed, he has no more authority to represent the United States in this Court than Bryce Harper, Taylor Swift, or Jeff Bezos,” they write.
The case is United States v. Trump, No. 23-624 in the Supreme Court of the United States.
