emptywheel

It's about control over the executive branch, but not the scope of executive branch power, so you could have a weak & unitary exec, or strong & non-unitary. 1/

So torture Q is about strength of exec, and ability to disregard legislative limits, not degree of control over subordinates. 2/2

What about Dersh's & Co.'s obstruction theory? The latest is that you cannot inquire even into the motives for why POTUS does an Act authorized by Art. II (in this case firing, though he uses pardon power by analogy).

I view that argument as a blend of claims about unitary executive (Pres has control over all subordinates) and inherent exec power (total discretionary control over prosecutory power). 1/

Given Mueller cant/wont induct President, Dersh argument also irrelevant. Whether Pres has power doesnt matter for impeachment inquiry, which necessarily considers how power (mis)used. 2/2

But it matters in terms of whether POTUS will comply with a subpoena if Mueller ends up issuing one, and the reasons he would give for it.

Yes. We agree on that point.

1/ I don't think so. If Mueller subpoenas Trump (which I doubt--they'll likely work out an accommodation) and Trump resists, the grounds will not be that the POTUS's actions are not valid subjects of the SC investigation, or . . . @jacklgoldsmith