Making the AG more independent

[Sir Mohamed]

Since William Barr has become a complete lapdog for Trump, should the position of AG become more independent from the prez? If so, what would be your suggestions? Another appointment mode? A fixed term without allowing the prez to fire him? Or only with senate approval? I think it would be interesting if the Supreme Court would appoint the AG for a fixed term, with 7 votes needed there.

[Xeuma]

I think Congress needs to do its job and codify pre-existing norms into law AND actually impeach if the President breaks those laws.

[Blue3]

I think Congress needs to do its job and codify pre-existing norms into law AND actually impeach if the President breaks those laws.

Which norms?

[Frodo]

I think Congress needs to do its job and codify pre-existing norms into law AND actually impeach if the President breaks those laws.

Which norms?

Checks and balances? 

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Make every single cabinet official and supreme court justice individually elected, as opposed to being appointed by the president.

[S019]

Make every single cabinet official and supreme court justice individually elected, as opposed to being appointed by the president.

Electing judges is dumb

I think electing Cabinet members could work, but only some, for example Secretary of Stare, Defense, and Homeland Security, should still be appointed, but I could see holding an election for something like HHS, HUD, Labor, or Commerce

[Blue3]

I think Congress needs to do its job and codify pre-existing norms into law AND actually impeach if the President breaks those laws.

Which norms?

Checks and balances? 

Which ones are you referring to as "norms" that Trump has broken, that should be codified into law?

[President Johnson]

Since the president is the head of the executive branch and the constitution requires for each appointee to be senate confirmed, I think any other "appointment mode" would be unconstitutional. Usually, the senate just do it's job properly with independence and any president should not interfere. And if he or she does, there should be a law that makes it an impeachable offense.

[Xeuma]

I think Congress needs to do its job and codify pre-existing norms into law AND actually impeach if the President breaks those laws.

Which norms?

Checks and balances? 

Which ones are you referring to as "norms" that Trump has broken, that should be codified into law?

Perhaps "norms" wasn't the right word. The President shouldn't be interfering with the Justice Department's work, especially when such work directly involves the President (see Trump pressuring Sessions to "de-recuse" himself). The AG should be, generally, independent of the President in almost all circumstances.

[Storr]

I could see AG being elected separately from the Presidential/Vice Presidential ticket, like in most states. Running as a three person ticket could work as well, "Trump Pence Sessions 2016" for example. I feel the people should have more say over who becomes AG because it is such an important position. In the Trump White House it seems to have become stronger than the Secretary of State and solidified itself as #3 in influence in the administration (obviously after Sessions left). I don't feel Senate confirmation is enough anymore. I don't think separate elections would work for other high profile cabinet positions though (DoD, State, DHS) due to their foreign policy/external threat focus which is the realm of the President alone. (Having those positions on the Pres/VP ticket might work, so that the public would at least know who would run such important agencies when deciding how to vote).
P.S. It's important to remember the SoS for states is much different that the national SoS. SoS in the states has the purpose of overseeing elections, administration of business contracts, and maintenance of records repositories.

[President Johnson]

I could see AG being elected separately from the Presidential/Vice Presidential ticket, like in most states. Running as a three person ticket could work as well, "Trump Pence Sessions 2016" for example. I feel the people should have more say over who becomes AG because it is such an important position. In the Trump White House it seems to have become stronger than the Secretary of State and solidified itself as #3 in influence in the administration (obviously after Sessions left). I don't feel Senate confirmation is enough anymore. I don't think separate elections would work for other high profile cabinet positions though (DoD, State, DHS) due to their foreign policy/external threat focus which is the realm of the President alone. (Having those positions on the Pres/VP ticket might work, so that the public would at least know who would run such important agencies when deciding how to vote).
P.S. It's important to remember the SoS for states is much different that the national SoS. SoS in the states has the purpose of overseeing elections, administration of business contracts, and maintenance of records repositories.

Wasn't the national Secretary of State originally designed to do the same and it just came over time that he is in charge of foreign policy?

Actually I'm opposed to too many elections for all sorts of offices. I'd prefer for governors to appoint these officerholders rather than electing them on ballot. Governor should just have a legislature approved cabinet.

[Vosem]

Yeah, I've been a proponent for a while of separate elections for Attorney General, the way most states do it.

[Sir Mohamed]

Yeah, I've been a proponent for a while of separate elections for Attorney General, the way most states do it.

Via PV or EC?

I have reservations about a national election because that politicizes an office that should actually be non-partisan. If an election, it should be non-partisan as local elections in CA.

[Blair]

The easiest way would be to split the role- the AG (off the top of my head) as a lot of powers that interior ministers have in other nations, or in the Commonwealth, powers that the Home Secretary has. These often relate to policing, but I'm sure there's more.

Create an interior minister- who's a political appointee, who deals with the policy aspect, and then create an Attorney General, who like the FBI director is given a 10 year term, and can only be dismissed after a majority in the Senate approve it.

I don't understand electing the position; but that's just because we have a culture that doesn't elect it's judiciary, or its officers.

[Blue3]

Have Congress choose, no appointment from the President. Congress alone decides.

[President Johnson]

The easiest way would be to split the role- the AG (off the top of my head) as a lot of powers that interior ministers have in other nations, or in the Commonwealth, powers that the Home Secretary has. These often relate to policing, but I'm sure there's more.

Create an interior minister- who's a political appointee, who deals with the policy aspect, and then create an Attorney General, who like the FBI director is given a 10 year term, and can only be dismissed after a majority in the Senate approve it.

I don't understand electing the position; but that's just because we have a culture that doesn't elect it's judiciary, or its officers.

This would be a decent solution, though even fixed ten-year terms couldn't stop the president from removing this officer from his/her position. As head of the executive branch, the president is entitled to fire any federal employee of the exective branch.

Requirung senate approval for removal would be, as I wrote before, unconstitutional as the Supreme Court already ruled in the 1926 case Myers v. United States.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

It's pretty common from the minister of justice being a diffrent position than the attorney general. It's something worth considering.

[Frodo]

I like the idea of an independently elected Attorney General, as that would give the office a degree of protection from any President who has authoritarian tendencies (he or she cannot simply be dismissed, though they can still be impeached by Congress) and reinforce its role as an additional check on the chief executive.  And preferably by popular vote. 

And for those worrying about politicizing the office, it won't be any more politicized than the fifty attorneys general elected in their states.  We could make it non-partisan, but let's be real -that won't stop political parties from endorsing their favored candidate. 

[Mr. Smith]

I like the idea of an independently elected Attorney General, as that would give the office a degree of protection from any President who has authoritarian tendencies (he or she cannot simply be dismissed, though they can still be impeached by Congress) and reinforce its role as an additional check on the chief executive.  And preferably by popular vote. 

And for those worrying about politicizing the office, it won't be any more politicized than the fifty attorneys general elected in their states.  We could make it non-partisan, but let's be real -that won't stop political parties from endorsing their favored candidate. 

[Blue3]

I do NOT like the idea of an independently-elected AG, that would just make the position even more political and biased

I prefer:

Have Congress choose, no appointment from the President. Congress alone decides.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I like the idea of an independently elected Attorney General, as that would give the office a degree of protection from any President who has authoritarian tendencies (he or she cannot simply be dismissed, though they can still be impeached by Congress) and reinforce its role as an additional check on the chief executive.  And preferably by popular vote. 

And for those worrying about politicizing the office, it won't be any more politicized than the fifty attorneys general elected in their states.  We could make it non-partisan, but let's be real -that won't stop political parties from endorsing their favored candidate. 

New Jersey has what I've seen referred to as an "Imperial Governor" who (among other weird powers by gubernatorial standards) appoints the AG, but other than that I agree with this.

[Karpatsky]

Would it be feasible for the SC to choose?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Would it be feasible for the SC to choose?

The problem is that the Attorney General is part of the executive branch, while the Supreme Court is the highest judicial body. It's very much against the separation of powers.

[Xeuma]

Would it be feasible for the SC to choose?

The problem is that the Attorney General is part of the executive branch, while the Supreme Court is the highest judicial body. It's very much against the separation of powers.

I mean, the President appoints the AG with the consent of the Senate? Does that also go against the separation of powers?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Would it be feasible for the SC to choose?

The problem is that the Attorney General is part of the executive branch, while the Supreme Court is the highest judicial body. It's very much against the separation of powers.

I mean, the President appoints the AG with the consent of the Senate? Does that also go against the separation of powers?

No, that would be checks and balances.

The proposed scenario would be an equivalent to President giving assignments to the congressional committees or Senate appointing a National Security Advisor.