A former US attorney in Washington state, Roger Rogoff, is suing the Trump administration for firing him less than an hour after a panel of federal judges unanimously voted to appoint him to the role. Rogoff, a former judge and longtime prosecutor, was selected by the federal judges as the state’s top prosecutor for the Western District.

Constitutional Concerns

The lawsuit argues that Rogoff’s firing violates the Constitution and gives Trump the ability to rewrite law. The law clearly states that federal judges are allowed to select US attorneys until the role has been filled by a Senate-confirmed nominee. Since no person has yet been nominated, let alone confirmed, to fill the vacancy, Rogoff’s lawsuit claims that his firing is unjustified.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche wrote in a social media post that district court judges can appoint a temporary US Attorney, and the President can fire them. However, Rogoff’s lawsuit disputes this claim, stating that the President cannot grant himself the authority to make those interim appointments instead, nor can he rewrite the law to require presidential approval of the district court’s choice.

Precedent and Implications

Rogoff is not the first lead prosecutor appointed by a panel of district court judges to be swiftly fired by the Trump administration. Other US attorney’s offices have had similar tangles between their district court judges and the Trump administration, with the Justice Department putting in place a top prosecutor whom the judges found wasn’t validly in that role.

The lawsuit has significant implications for the balance of power between the executive and judicial branches of government. If successful, it could limit the President’s ability to fire US attorneys appointed by federal judges and ensure that the Justice Department is led by qualified and Senate-confirmed nominees.

Original reporting: KTVZ (Central Oregon) — read the source article.