Inspectors general don’t perform, get fired

Inspectors general don’t perform, get fired
By Terry A. Hurlbut
Over the weekend, President Donald Trump fired seventeen inspectors general from various Cabinet departments. Every one of these people, according to one correspondent, has a history of falling down on the job. Now some of them are contesting the dismissal. In so doing, they rely on a 2022 law, that came out of the Democrat-controlled 117th Congress. That law strongly resembles the law that provoked the impeachment of President Andrew Johnson. So Trump is setting up yet another Constitutional challenge to standing doctrines of dubious validity.
The discharge of the inspectors general
Inspectors general each work in a Cabinet-level department but do not answer to that department’s Secretary. Their job is to detect and eliminate fraud, waste and abuse. But RealClearPolitics’ Susan Crabtree asserts that most of them “whitewash” reports and handle complaints in a corrupt political manner. She shared the first report of the mass firing in a long-form, or at least medium-form, X post:
‼️‼️TRUMP FIRES 17 INSPECTORS GENERALS in a late-night purge punctuating the end of his first five days in office.
Donald Trump dismissed 17 federal agency watchdogs. I've covered these IGs for years -- and trust me when I say, even though they are charged with ferreting out waste and abuse, many have long histories of WHITEWASHING reports and playing politics with complaints - I have personal experience reporting on DoD and USAID [United States Agency for International Development] and DHS IG misconduct. The DHS IG I reported on roughly a decade ago ended up getting fired.
Among those spared Friday is current Department of Homeland Security Inspector General Joseph V. Cuffari Jr., who is conducting multiple investigations into the Secret Service failures that led to two assassination attempts on President Trump's life. Cuffari Jr. is a Trump appointee from his first term who has faced more than his fair share of liberal attacks and lawfare.
Also spared: Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz remained unaffected.
The move follows Trump’s past efforts, including firing whistle-blower-linked Inspector General Michael Atkinson during his first impeachment trial.
Source: Washington Post and New York Times
https://x.com/susancrabtree/status/1883132412755927047
The New York Times did report early on the firing of the inspectors general. One user questioned the retention of Michael Horowitz, accusing him of whitewashing complaints for thirteen years. Susan Crabtree promised to investigate further.
https://x.com/susancrabtree/status/1883196382099677593
Reuters reports that the inspectors general received their termination notices by email. They also said that Democrats contested the terminations immediately. New Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) accused Trump of “a clear violation of the law,” but did not say which law. But the independent Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency did offer some further detail.
According to Reuters, current law says a President must notify Congress thirty days in advance of terminating any inspector general. This notice must specify "substantive rationale, including detailed and case specific reasons" for dismissing any inspector general.
A Grok search on Susan Crabtree’s first post shows that past Presidents have fired inspectors general. The best precedent on point is Ronald Reagan’s firing of sixteen such officers when he took office. Reagan said then that he wanted to appoint his own officers to this duty, and that this was within presidential authority.
Resistance already shaping up
Politico.com reported that fired State Department IG Cardell Richardson, Sr. will report to work anyway tomorrow (January 27).
Hannibal “Mike” Ware, Chair of the IG Council and IG for the Small Business Administration, sent a letter protesting the firings to Sergio Gor, Director of Presidential Personnel. In it he cited title and section:
5 U.S.C. § 403(b), as amended by the section 5202(a) of the Securing Inspector General Independence Act of 2022 (Title LII, Subtitle A, of P.L. 117-263, 136 Stat. 2395, 3222).
Kyle Cheney, Senior Legal Affairs Reporter for Poltico, shared the letter and his own impression of the dust-up:
NEW: Inspectors general say Trump's removals may be illegal since they fail to comply with the 2022 law requiring 30 days notice to Congress. WH will likely argue this is unconstitutional, but this will be a fight. W/Megan Messerly [White House correspondent for Politico] and Josh Gerstein [another senior legal affairs reporter].
https://x.com/kyledcheney/status/1883154953163907281
In addition, nearly two dozen House Democrats sent a letter of protest to Trump himself. The lead signatories included Reps. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) and Jaime Raskin (D-Md.). These two men are, respectively, the ranking members at House Oversight and House Judiciary. Their letter made much the same points Ware’s letter made, citing the latest law on inspectors general.
Two other documents clearly indicate that House Democrats have declared war against Trump. These firings are the immediate trigger, but perhaps they were spoiling for a fight. The documents are:
• Official statement by Ranking Member Connolly, protesting the very idea of replacing those inspectors general, and
• Letter from Rep. Connolly to M. Ware, clearly proposing an alliance against Trump.
The second letter raises the specter of yet a third impeachment of Trump.
Constitutional question
This controversy should be familiar to any serious student of American history. In 1867, during the bitter partisan feud that was Reconstruction, Congress passed the Tenure of Office Act. Actually it passed that Act over the veto of President Andrew Johnson. That Act held, in relevant part,
That every person … , holding any civil office to which he has been appointed by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and every person who shall hereafter be appointed to any such office, and shall become duly qualified to act therein, is, and shall be, entitled to hold such office until a successor shall have been in like manner appointed and duly qualified, except as herein otherwise provided.
Originally the bill excepted Cabinet officers – but a subsequent amendment removed that exception.
President Johnson, determined not to let Congress tell him whom he could hire and fire, fired War Secretary Edwin M. Stanton. Stanton barricaded himself in his office – and Congress drew up Articles of Impeachment against Johnson over that firing. As history records, the Senate failed by one vote to convict Johnson – whereupon Stanton dismantled his barricade and resigned. In 1887 Congress repealed the Tenure of Office Act.
The Inspector General’s Act of 1978 as amended, sounds much like the Tenure of Office Act. Therefore it is just as weak. In fact, today on Fox News Sunday, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) defended the firing on that very ground.
Time and time again, the Supreme Court has said that Congress can’t impose restrictions on the president’s power to remove officers. In President Trump’s first term, he removed the Director of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau despite limitations on the President’s constitutional power to remove officers, that was litigated at the Supreme Court and the president won.
So ultimately, these inspectors general serve at the pleasure of the President. He wants new people in there. He wants people who focused on getting out waste and fraud and abuse and reforming these agencies, he has a right to have to get in there who he wants.
https://x.com/SteveGuest/status/1883600582688244222
Trump also has a right to appoint officers he can trust. Furthermore, Sen. Cotton is correct about Supreme Court precedent on point. That precedent says a President may remove any executive branch official at will, without the consent of Senate or House. Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1926), and Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, 591 U.S. 197 (2020).
Bottom line: those inspectors general haven’t legs to stand on
The Supreme Court decided the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau case 5-4. After that, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett took her place. Originalists and Institutionalists both decided in favor of Trump, holding that anything less would violate separation of powers. In a case of, say, Ware et al. v. Trump, the Court would likely decide 6-3 in Trump’s favor.
If Reps. Connolly, Raskin, et al. bring Articles of Impeachment on this matter, they’ll only make fools of themselves. Apart from the unconstitutional nature of the titles and sections they cite, the Senate is even less likely to return a simple-majority vote to convict, much less the two-thirds vote the Constitution (Article I Section 3 Clause 6) requires. So those inspectors general have no case to stay in office, and those House Democrats have no case to impeach.
President Trump is doing what he should do. He is removing certain officers he can’t trust to uphold the country’s interests, nor even to do their jobs. But he also is challenging unconstitutional laws in court, at a time when such challenges are most likely to succeed.
Link to:
The article:
https://cnav.news/2025/01/26/news/inspectors-general-perform-fired/

Susan Crabtree’s report:
https://x.com/susancrabtree/status/1883132412755927047
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/24/us/politics/trump-fires-inspectors-general.html?searchResultPosition=1
https://x.com/susancrabtree/status/1883196382099677593

Other reports:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-fires-least-12-independent-inspectors-general-washington-post-reports-2025-01-25/
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/25/donald-trump-inspectors-general-firing-00200611
https://www.ignet.gov/
https://static.politico.com/b3/3e/5baf92224503a3cfa8edb460a1c2/cigie-letter-to-white-house-1-24-2025.pdf

Kyle Cheney’s post:
https://x.com/kyledcheney/status/1883154953163907281

Letters and statements from House Democrats:
https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/democrats-oversight.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2025-01-25.%20Dem%20Committee%20RMs%20to%20Trump%20re.%20IG%20Firings.pdf
https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/news/press-releases/ranking-member-connollys-statement-president-trumps-purge-federal-inspectors
https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/democrats-oversight.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/2025-01-22.GEC%20et%20al.%20to%20Ware-CIGIE%20re%20Intergrity.pdf

Senator Cotton’s defense of the firings:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/tom-cotton-defends-trump-firing-18-inspectors-general
https://x.com/SteveGuest/status/1883600582688244222

Supreme Court precedents on point:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/272/52
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/591/19-7/

Declarations of Truth:
https://x.com/DecTruth

Declarations of Truth Locals Community:
https://declarationsoftruth.locals.com/

Conservative News and Views:
https://cnav.news/

Clixnet Media
https://clixnet.com/