Latest news with #OfficeofLegalCounsel
Politico
a day ago
- Politics
- Politico
What Trump can — and can't — do in his bid to take over law enforcement in DC
The Trump administration is currently on trial in Los Angeles over its deployment of the California guard in June to quell immigration-related protests in that city. That trial will test whether a federal judge believes Trump's deployment ran afoul of that 1878 law and must be rescinded. But the legality of using the guard in D.C. may be different. Presidential use of the D.C. guard has rarely faced legal resistance because it has typically happened in cooperation with D.C. leaders. And the Justice Department has long maintained that the D.C. guard, unlike the other guards, can be used for ordinary law enforcement without violating Posse Comitatus. A 1989 legal opinion from the department's Office of Legal Counsel found that President George H.W. Bush could use the D.C. guard to carry out law enforcement missions in D.C. as part of the so-called war on drugs. If Trump's deployment of the D.C. guard is challenged in court, a judge would almost certainly take note of the OLC opinion, but would not be bound to follow it. Does Trump have the power to 'federalize' D.C.? Trump cannot singlehandedly wrest control of the district's government. The Constitution grants Congress the power to 'exercise exclusive legislation' over the 'seat of government' of the United States. In 1973, with the passage of the Home Rule Act, Congress created the local D.C. government that still exists to this day. Under the act, D.C. has significant control of day-to-day local affairs. But the federal government — including federal law enforcement agencies such as the U.S. Capitol Police and the U.S. Park Police — retain control over federal land and property. And Congress has the final say on local D.C. policies: The Home Rule Act allows Congress to effectively veto any legislation passed by the D.C. Council. The president alone has no authority to 'federalize' the D.C. government; he would need Congress to amend the Home Rule Act. Has Trump sent federal authorities into D.C. before? Yes, Trump has tested the boundaries of his ability to use federal agents and the National Guard in Washington. Trump has clear control and authority over tens of thousands of federal law enforcement officers who work in the area for federal agencies, including the FBI, the Marshals Service, the Secret Service, the Park Police and others. Trump deployed many of those agencies in June 2020 to clear Black Lives Matter protesters from Lafayette Park, across from the White House.
Hindustan Times
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Was Trump legally authorized to bomb Iran? DOJ answers
Jun 23, 2025 06:24 AM IST A senior Justice Department official has noted that Donald Trump conducted the strikes against Iran under his Article II constitutional powers, in consultation with the White House counsel and the Justice Department. While the president does have broad authority to order the use of military force and to advance other national interests under Article II of the Constitution, Congress has the authority to declare war under Article I. Was Trump legally authorized to bomb Iran? DOJ answers(AP) According to the DOJ official, President Trump is also relying on memos written by the DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel under administrations of both parties, as reported by CNN. They added that if the conflict continues for a long period, the administration might need Congress' approval. However, they noted that 'bombing three nuclear sites' does not require congressional approval under Article I, and as the Trump administration has the backing of senior officials in the House and Senate, the White House is confident it is on solid legal ground. Previously, a White House official told CNN that Trump used 'his legal authority as commander in chief' to order the strikes on Iran. Meanwhile, Attorney General Pam Bondi is set to testify before the House. She is expected to be questioned about the issue, and could reiterate Trump's dependency on his Article II powers and the earlier memos from the Office of Legal Counsel. The US' bombing of Iran Trump recently announced that the US had launched strikes against three Iranian nuclear sites. The decision to involve the US directly came after more than a week of strikes by Israel on Iran. In a Truth Social post, Trump previously wrote, 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. All planes are now outside of Iran air space. A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home. Congratulations to our great American Warriors. There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE! Thank you for your attention to this matter.'
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump gets the OK to end protections for national monuments, from the Statue of Liberty to the Grand Canyon
President Donald Trump has the authority to abolish national monuments protected by his predecessors, the Justice Department recently said. In a legal document dated to May 27, the department overturned a nearly 90-year-old opinion that said presidents did not have that ability, saying that its conclusions were 'wrong' and 'can no longer be relied upon.' 'The Antiquities Act of 1906 permits a president to alter a prior declaration of a national monument, including by finding that the 'landmarks,' 'structures,' or 'objects' identified in the prior declaration either never were or no longer are deserving of the act's protections; and such an alteration can have the effect of eliminating entirely the reservation of the parcel of land previously associated with a national monument,' the Office of Legal Counsel's Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lanora Pettit wrote. ' The contrary conclusion of the Attorney General in Proposed Abolishment of Castle Pinckney National Monument, 39 Op. Att'y Gen. 185 (1938), was incorrect.' The document specifically refers to former President Joe Biden establishing California's Chuckwalla and Sáttítla Highlands National Monuments. The monuments, that have particular significance to Native American tribes and extend over some 848,000 acres of land, barred oil and natural gas drilling and mining there. The Trump administration told The Washington Post in March that it has plans to eliminate them. In April, the paper reported that Interior Department Officials were studying whether to scale back at least six national monuments, and a person briefed on the matter said the aim was to free up land for drilling and mining. Biden established 10 new monuments during his tenure. 'America's energy infrastructure was on life-support when President Trump got into office; and in nearly six months, the administration has shocked this critical industry back into life, making good on another promise to the American people,' the White House's Harrison Fields, principal deputy press secretary, told The Independent in an emailed statement responding to question about the Justice Department's opinion. 'It's imperative that the Senate passes OBBB to completely end Biden's war on American energy, and will liberate our federal lands and waters to oil, gas, coal, geothermal, and mineral leasing.' The Justice Department did not immediately respond to The Independent's request for comment on the matter. While this opinion does not overturn any national monument, it hints at future action. Trump has taken steps to shrink monuments in the past. During his first administration, he moved to slash Utah's Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments: the first such move of its kind in more than 50 years. Biden reversed Trump's decision before the courts could make a final ruling on the matter. Earlier this year, Trump opened the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine national monument to commercial fishing while leaving the monument in place. The Interior Department is weighing changes to monuments across the country as part of the push to 'restore American energy dominance.' The National Park Service alone manages more than 100 national monuments established under the authority of the Antiquities Act. Some are also co-managed by the U.S. and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Army, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Some of those include the Statue of Liberty, the Stonewall Inn, the Grand Canyon, Sequoia National Forest, and the Lincoln Memorial. While Congress must approve the designation of national parks, a national monument is designated by a president via the Antiquities Act. Around half of the nation's national parks were first designated monuments, and all except three presidents have used the act to protect areas both offshore and on land. Presidents, including Dwight Eisenhower, have also diminished monuments. Responding to the document, environmental advocate groups have asserted there might not be much legal standing and that moves to eliminate or shrink monuments would be less than popular. "There's no reason to think the OLC opinion should make much difference to the White House. National monuments have broad public and political support, and shrinking or revoking them will only damage the Trump Administration's popularity,' Aaron Paul, the staff attorney for the Grand Canyon Trust, told The Independent in an emailed statement. 'Besides, if the president tries to shrink or eliminate monuments, it would send the question to the courts, which is the real test of whether the OLC's views have any validity or not." 'The Trump administration can come to whatever conclusion it likes, but the courts have upheld monuments established under the Antiquities Act for over a century. This opinion is just that, an opinion. It does not mean presidents can legally shrink or eliminate monuments at will,' Jennifer Rokala, executive director of The Center for Western Priorities, said in a written statement. 'Once again the Trump administration finds itself on the wrong side of history and at odds with Western voters,' she said. With reporting from The Associated Press
Yahoo
06-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
There's nothing but cruel cynicism backing the Biden autopen investigation
For President Donald Trump, there tends to be a fine line between the dangerous and the absurd. His latest broadside against his predecessor Joe Biden hopscotches between the two effortlessly. In a memo issued Wednesday, the president ordered the White House counsel and Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate whether Biden's aides used 'autopen' signatures to hide an alleged cognitive decline. Trump's obsession with the use of an autopen in Biden's White House stretches back months. He claimed in March that pardons Biden signed were supposedly void because of an autopen's use. Last month, he foreshadowed to reporters that his administration would 'start looking into this whole thing with who signed this legislation. Who signed legislation opening our border? I don't think he knew.' It's a bonkers line of inquiry, not least because autopens aren't exactly a new thing for a chief executive to use. Presidents going back to Harry Truman have had them around to sign their name to personal documents and correspondence. It became a talking point for Republicans in 2011, though, when President Barack Obama became the first to use the machine to affix his signature to a law while he was overseas. He used the autopen again while in Hawaii in 2013 to sign legislation to prevent a government shutdown. Even then, though, it was a bit of a tempest in a teapot, legally speaking at least. Before Obama even became president, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel had determined under President George W. Bush that it was constitutionally kosher to use an autopen to sign legislation. 'We emphasize that we are not suggesting that the President may delegate the decision to approve and sign a bill,' wrote Deputy Attorney General Howard Nielson for the OLC, 'only that, having made this decision, he may direct a subordinate to affix the President's signature to the bill.' Not everyone has agreed with that assessment, but there were no legal challenges to its usage during the Obama era. But now, this supposed secret autopen plot has gone from Truth Social posts to Justice Department investigations. Whatever probe Bondi conducts would theoretically hinge not on whether the White House autopen was used to sign official documents but on somehow proving that it was used without Biden's express authorization. Is there any evidence backing up Trump's allegation? Of course not, and Trump himself said as much in the Oval Office on Thursday. But just because the investigation will likely go nowhere doesn't mean that there isn't ample reason for Republicans to lean into this fiction. The rush from Trump's allies to capitalize on the conspiracy theory was telling, as my colleague Steve Benen noted Thursday: 'With this in mind, the endgame is coming into focus: Trump and his party want to invalidate parts of Biden's presidency, clearing the way for, among other things, new partisan investigations into those whom Biden protected, further empowering the incumbent in the process.' I'll add to that assessment that the focus on Biden's supposed actions — rather than on Biden himself — is cynically clever. It darkly mirrors the internal debate Democrats are still having over whether Biden's diminished capacity to run for re-election was at all purposefully hidden until it was too late. In going one step further, Trump's investigation adds an evidence-free motive to explain why Americans would be kept out of the loop. There's a thread to pull at there that might lure in some of the more disillusioned on the left who are eager to see shadowy puppet masters pulling the party's strings. Again, none of this will amount to anything legally without concrete evidence that a law or other official document was falsely signed without Biden's consent. In both reality and the conspiracy theory being spun here, the autopen is merely a tool to be used. And in Trump's hands, it's gone from being a useful time-saver to a handy excuse to further politically persecute his predecessor's allies. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
06-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
'Biggest scandal in American history' or a 'distraction': A look at Trump's autopen claims
President Donald Trump has ordered an investigation into the Biden administration's use of an automatic signature pen, alleging that Joe Biden wasn't aware of many of his presidential orders and appointments. "This conspiracy marks one of the most dangerous and concerning scandals in American history," Trump said in a memorandum Wednesday directing the probe. Biden denied the allegations, calling them "ridiculous and false." 'This is nothing more than a distraction by Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans who are working to push disastrous legislation that would cut essential programs like Medicaid and raise costs on American families, all to pay for tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy and big corporations,' Biden said in a statement Wednesday, referring to the massive GOP bill to advance Trump's agenda. Here's a look at what's known — and what isn't — about the allegations Trump has referred to on social media as "the biggest scandal in American history," how they started and what might come next. An autopen is a device that replicates a person's signature or writings. Variations of it have been around for centuries — Thomas Jefferson got one in 1803 that he used to make copies of his correspondence. They're often used for mass reproductions of signatures on items like diplomas, and there are now digital versions. They can, according to 2005 guidance from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. 'The President need not personally perform the physical act of affixing his signature to a bill he approves and decides to sign in order for the bill to become law,' the guidance said. 'Rather, the President may sign a bill ... by directing a subordinate to affix the President's signature to such a bill, for example by autopen.' They have. President George W. Bush — who had requested the guidance from the Justice Department — did not wind up using an autopen for official actions, but both Biden and President Barack Obama did while they were traveling. USA Today reported in 2017 that Obama used an autopen to issue dozens of pardons the previous year while he was on vacation in Hawaii. Biden, meanwhile, signed a funding extension for federal aviation programs via autopen while he traveling to San Francisco in 2024, CNN reported at the time. That's unclear. There is no official record of Biden's using an autopen for official government business. Trump's memorandum says, 'The vast majority of Biden's executive actions were signed using a mechanical signature pen, often called an autopen, as opposed to Biden's own hand.' Trump has offered no evidence to support the claims. He has, but he maintains it wasn't for anything important. Speaking to reporters on Air Force One in March, Trump at first said that 'I never use' an autopen before he acknowledged that he had. On Thursday, he said that "I think it's very disrespectful to people when they get an autopen signature" but that he does use one to respond to letters. "I'd like to do it myself," he said, but he added that he gets thousands of letters a week and it's "not possible to do." Trump's memo directs "The Counsel to the President, in consultation with the Attorney General and the head of any other relevant executive department or agency (agency), shall investigate, to the extent permitted by law, whether certain individuals conspired to deceive the public about Biden's mental state and unconstitutionally exercise the authorities and responsibilities of the President." It also orders a probe into "the circumstances surrounding Biden's supposed execution of numerous executive actions during his final years in office," including "policy documents for which the autopen was used." Asked by NBC News whether he has any evidence that anything specific was signed without Biden's knowledge or that someone in the Biden administration acting illegally, Trump said, 'No, but I've uncovered, you know, the human mind.' 'I was in a debate with the human mind, and I don't think he knew what the hell he was doing,' he said Thursday, referring to his debate with Biden last year. The Justice Department declined to comment when it was asked whether the investigation into the autopen issue is a criminal one. The White House counsel's office does not conduct criminal probes. The House Oversight Committee is also investigating Republican allegations about Biden's using the autopen. 'Who was making the decisions? Who was authorizing his signature? Was it him?' committee chair James Comer, R-Ky., asked last month. The Justice Department guidance from 2005 hasn't been directly challenged in court, but a ruling last year involving presidential pardon powers lent some weight to the finding. A unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said presidents don't have to issue written or signed pardons for them to be implemented. 'The plain language of the Constitution imposes no such limit, broadly providing that the President 'shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.' The constitutional text is thus silent as to any particular form the President's clemency act must take to be effective,' the ruling said. While it's unclear how Trump came to seize on the allegations, right-wing media has focused on them for months, fueled in large part by a study from the conservative Heritage Foundation that accused the Biden administration of extensive autopen use, largely based on the timing of when Biden signed documents compared with when he was traveling. Some of the findings also came from an analysis of the signatures in the Federal Register. A National Archives spokesperson told the fact-checking website Snopes in March: 'At the beginning of each administration, the White House sends a sample of the President's signature to the Federal Register, which uses it to create the graphic image for all Presidential Documents published in the Federal Register.' Trump's memorandum doesn't give any indication of what might result from the investigation. Trump has already revoked scores of Biden's executive actions — including about 80 on his first day in office — and he has suggested before that the use of an autopen could be used to challenge some of the pardons Biden issued. 'The 'Pardons' that Sleepy Joe Biden gave to the Unselect Committee of Political Thugs, and many others, are hereby declared VOID, VACANT, AND OF NO FURTHER FORCE OR EFFECT, because of the fact that they were done by Autopen,' Trump wrote on Truth Social, referring to the pardons Biden gave to members of the House committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. There's no evidence that Biden wasn't aware of those pardons — he'd discussed the possibility he would sign off on them in a Jan. 8 interview with USA Today and later issued a lengthy statement explaining why he'd signed them. While the Constitution give the president unique powers to issue pardons, it makes no provision for subsequent presidents to rescind them. Jeffrey Crouch, a politics professor at American University and author of the book 'The Presidential Pardon Power,' told NBC News in March that 'Biden's pardons are highly unlikely to be revoked somehow because of the apparent use of an autopen.' In his statement Wednesday, Biden said, 'Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency. I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn't is ridiculous and false." Trump told reporters Thursday that "I don't think Biden would know" if he signed something. This article was originally published on
