Post

Mark Histed
@markhisted.org

Congress post-Myers cared about protecting some agency functions: “particularly adjudicatory functions— [they thought] there was no way that the businesses were going to buy into an [Art II] court that is politically controlled” You could make the same argument for grantmaking decisions too.

Brennan Center@brennancenter.org

Jane Manners, a constitutional historian and member of the Brennan Center’s Historians Council, filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in Trump v. Cook, arguing that the attempted removal of Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook is unlawful www.brennancenter.org/sites/defaul...

brennancenter.orgbrennancenter.org
Mark Histed
@markhisted.org

There’s no way that science that is the product of a political decision process for grant-making will remain legitimate amongst scientists and the public—no way the public will buy into this.

1 repost5 likes

Mark Histed
@markhisted.org

So grantmaking is thus a quasi-judicial function in some sense, or at least it should be justified for many of the same reasons.