Opinion of the Unitary Executive Theory

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive_theory

Negative. It's complete trash, like John Yoo.

Still, the Republicans didn't seem too fond of it under Clinton.

[A18]

I agree with the actual theory (as any honest, literate person does), but not John Yoo's "version."

[Emsworth]

The theory of the unitary executive is perfectly correct. The Constitution declares that "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America" (Article II, Section 1, Clause 1). The executive power is not vested in the Cabinet, nor in executive departments, nor in government agencies. It is vested in the President alone. Not even the Vice President shares it.

Thus, the President is the sole and unitary exerciser of executive power: other federal officers are merely his agents, and must obey his orders. Federal officers : President :: Clerks : Congress.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

However the theory holds that independent counsels are unconstitutional and the President is essentially above the law and can disregard treaties and laws. Ken Starr and Patrick Fitzgerald's actions are illegal according to John Yoo.

[A18]

With regard to being able to ignore statutes and treaties, the only people who believe in that version of the unitary executive theory (a theory, which, incidentally, has nothing to do with a unitary executive) are John Yoo (I guess) and every 20th century president.

[J. J.]

However the theory holds that independent counsels are unconstitutional and the President is essentially above the law and can disregard treaties and laws. Ken Starr and Patrick Fitzgerald's actions are illegal according to John Yoo.

Not quite, as in the Andrew Jackson case, though Yoo might interpret it that way.  The idea that a president has certain powers dates back to Washington.

Congress does have substantial powers, i.e., money and impeachment.

[Emsworth]

However the theory holds that independent counsels are unconstitutional...

Independent counsel are unconstitutional. One need not appeal to the unitary executive theory; the separation of powers doctrine is sufficient. The power to investigate and prosecute a crime are completely executive. Therefore, the executive branch alone may exercise this authority. The Congress cannot force the executive to investigate or prosecute, just as the executive cannot force Congress to pass a bill. If the President is refusing to investigate a crime without good reason, then the only remedies are impeachment, and an appeal to the People on election day.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That is merely John Yoo's belief, which, as A18 correctly points out, has nothing to do with the unitary executive doctrine. As its name suggests, the unitary executive doctrine means that the executive branch is unitary--i.e., consists of a single person. Whether the President can or cannot ignore the law is a completely different issue.