Former Justice Department official and syndicated radio host Mark Levin made a concrete argument against the constitutionality of the Robert Mueller investigation Tuesday night on Fox News’ Hannity program.
The crux of Levin’s argument revolves around the revelation, in Politico, that many of the attorneys on Mueller’s team have registered as “Special Assistant US Attorneys” in a Virginia federal court:
Several court filings indicate that when lawyers from Mueller’s office appeared in federal court in Alexandria earlier this year, they did so not only as representatives of Mueller’s office but as special assistant United States attorneys (SAUSAs) attached to the United States attorney’s office there.
That designation gives the Mueller prosecutors a kind of dual status that could complicate any attempt by U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III to try to shift the case to federal prosecutors based in Alexandria — a possibility the judge mentioned on a couple of occasions during a contentious hearing earlier this month.
That designation may make the Manafort indictment immune to Judge Ellis’ questions regarding Mueller’s jurisdiction and the scope of his investigation, but, Levin points out, it triggers some serious Article II constitutional conflicts:
Rosenstein usurped the authority of the president of the United States to nominate whoever he wants as a prosecutor,” Levin said. “Mr. Mueller is serving unconstitutionally in violation of the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution because of the way Rod Rosenstein appointed him.”
Article II of the constitution makes clear that principal executive branch positions are to be filled directly by the President. If Mueller’s attorneys are “SPecial Assistant US Attorneys: that makes Mueller a defacto “Roving US Attorney” Levin explained.
His appointment is subject to Article II of the constitution and the President should have been the one to make his appointment, not Rod Rosenstein.
Watch the entire segment here at Fox News.