Excerpt: “The Court finds that there is a substantial likelihood that plaintiff will succeed on the merits. The effort by the White House to terminate the Special Counsel without identifying any cause plainly contravenes the statute, which states, ‘[t]he Special Counsel may be removed by the President only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.’ 5 U.S.C. § 1211(b). This language expresses Congress’s clear intent to ensure the independence of the Special Counsel and insulate his work from being buffeted by the winds of political change. Defendants’ only response to this inarguable reading of the text is that the statute is unconstitutional. Defs.’ Opp. at 8–11. But no court has said so, and to date, the Supreme Court has taken pains to carve the OSC out of its pronouncements concerning the President’s broad authority to remove officials who assist him in discharging his duties at will. Moreover, the reasoning underlying the decisions relied upon by defendants does not extend to the unique office and official involved in this case.”
order
(27 pages)
Share