Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

dmcnaughton1 t1_j8exbqm wrote

I'm confused as to how Biden is able to fire this guy. I thought the Architect of the Capitol is a legislative branch agency, not an executive branch one.

76

LimitedSwimmer t1_j8eyce3 wrote

Nominated by the president and confirmed by the senate I looked and didn't see anything clear cut but would think misconduct gives a lot of leeway.

115

dmcnaughton1 t1_j8eykcp wrote

Ah, that makes sense. If nominated by the President then they can be fired at will. SCOTUS opinion on that dates back to Andrew Jackson. No way to legislatively protect a presidential appointment from being fired.

45

avatoin t1_j8gu9d4 wrote

IIRC, this doesn't apply to committee type positions like the FTC. If it's a single position then he can fire, but Congress can protect committees/councils.

2

TimeRemove t1_j8ezv1e wrote

Architect of the Capitol (AOC) is a federal agency. The Architect of the Capitol (federal agency) has an appointee (10-year term) also, confusingly, called the Architect of the Capitol. It has around 2.5K federal employees and an almost $1B budget.

So it being both a federal agency and also a presidential appointee, means the President has a lot of power. In this case congress essentially told Biden to replace him (bipartisan), and he did. Likely won't be controversial.

54

asdaaaaaaaa t1_j8fe5l0 wrote

> The Architect of the Capitol (federal agency) has an appointee (10-year term) also, confusingly, called the Architect of the Capitol.

I expect absolutely nothing less in the form of confusing bullshit from our government.

14

LepoGorria t1_j8fgdch wrote

Gentlemen, affairs of the State take precedence over affairs of the State!

10

johnjohn4011 t1_j8fffhm wrote

Won't be controversial? Lol - Everything Biden does totally sucks and was the worst decision it's kind EVER, to certain, unnamed people.

−2

FamilyStyle2505 t1_j8fpwii wrote

Let's just see what happens. No use projecting negativity in advance.

7

johnjohn4011 t1_j8fqshn wrote

Lol ok - was that statement incorrect? Just pointing out that there are those that will never be publicly happy with any decision made by any Democrat no matter what - except to gloat over their supposed mistakes. Such people thrive on controversy and would not know what to do without it.

4

bubbafatok t1_j8i6qwa wrote

I mean, you're not exactly treading new ground here. There's an old joke (very very old) about a president predicting that if he walked on water the news reports would exclaim "President Can't Swim". Going back my entire life, which is back to the 70's, I can't think of a president would could do blow their nose without someone on the opposition side attacking them for it.

2

DFWPunk t1_j8eyze1 wrote

It's a Presidential appointment, despite being under the Legislative Branch.

16

JennJayBee t1_j8ffnro wrote

Someone already answered, but I want to add that there were bipartisan calls from Congress for his removal, and that includes McCarthy. So even if it wasn't a presidential appointment, I'm sure Congress likely would have done the same here.

13

nochinzilch t1_j8gso46 wrote

The building (or campus if you like) is federal government property and managed by the federal government.

2

Benni_Shoga t1_j8fjrt3 wrote

He is accountable to any branch

0

dmcnaughton1 t1_j8g4tor wrote

Yes, but nominally he's directly accountable to the President as he's a presidential appointee to a legislatively created position. Congress could impeach him, and the courts could enjoin him, but only the president can fire him.

Edit: clarified it's a legislatively created position. Constitutional positions, such as Federal Judges, are presidential appointments, but are not directly accountable to the President and are only answerable to Congress.

2