Richard Rothman & Katelin Shugart-Schmidt
86 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1348
The legal limits of for-cause removal protections for executive officials have barely been defined, even as the current presidential administration considers removing protected officials. Open questions include whether and how courts will choose to define “cause,” as well as whether courts will inquire into the authenticity of a President’s stated justification for removal. This Essay suggests that while courts should define “cause” and determine whether an alleged action meets that standard, courts should not allow inquiry into the factual support comprising a President’s removal justification, no matter how obviously false or incorrect that factual assertion might be. This approach would balance Congress’s legitimate right to structure the federal government in the way it sees fit against the President’s legitimate right to operate that government. Other options, including litigating the case in full or dismissing it outright, fail to account for the valid competing rights. Deciding the legal definition and application of for-cause removal provisions would not unduly disrupt the President’s administration of government, and Congress has adequate tools to investigate the President’s asserted factual basis, should it believe that the professed reason for termination was invalid.
