“Albright blocked a NLRB administrative proceeding involving SpaceX from going forward because, he concluded, the NLRB’s administrative law judges are “unconstitutionally insulated from removal” and the same is true of NLRB’s members themselves.”
Am I missing something? Aren’t we talking about federal judges who are insulated from removal…
“Albright blocked a NLRB administrative proceeding involving SpaceX from going forward because, he concluded, the NLRB’s administrative law judges are “unconstitutionally insulated from removal” and the same is true of NLRB’s members themselves.”
Am I missing something? Aren’t we talking about federal judges who are insulated from removal, who are saying this about agency judges and employees, who I believe can be removed at the pleasure of the president, whereas federal judges generally cannot? Pot, kettle, glass house, rocks?
“Albright blocked a NLRB administrative proceeding involving SpaceX from going forward because, he concluded, the NLRB’s administrative law judges are “unconstitutionally insulated from removal” and the same is true of NLRB’s members themselves.”
Am I missing something? Aren’t we talking about federal judges who are insulated from removal, who are saying this about agency judges and employees, who I believe can be removed at the pleasure of the president, whereas federal judges generally cannot? Pot, kettle, glass house, rocks?
I mean, not to accept their argument, but an Article III federal judge is a different branch, so that’s just a totally different thing.