- Losing My Perspicacity
- Posts
- Losing My Perspicacity, December 9, 2025
Losing My Perspicacity, December 9, 2025
Is Kristi Noem on her way out?
Julie DiCaro
December 09, 2025
Good morning and Happy Tuesday! Thanks for reading along this morning. And after a long weekend of illness, boy am I glad to see you guys.
If you paid attention to the news at all yesterday, you probably heard about oral arguments that took place in the Supreme Court over the Unitary Executive Theory, though possibly not by that name. Here’s what it is and why it matters.
The Unitary Executive theory is the idea that the President of the United States has complete and total control over the entire Executive Branch, from his cabinet members on down to entry-level staff, including independent commissions, and can do, essentially, whatever he wants.
You’re probably thinking, “Isn’t that true, though? The President is in charge of the Executive Branch.” Well, yes and no. First, let’s acknowledge that somewhere around four million people work for the Executive Branch. Secondly, some positions, such as the heads of independent regulatory commissions (the SEC, FDIC, and the Federal Reserve, for example) were created by Congress and intended to operate independently of the President, even though they are neither in the Congressional nor the Judiciary Branches of government. They exist in the in-between, though the President does have limited control over some appointments.
Let’s take the SEC, for example, which consists of five commissioners, no more than three of whom can belong to the same political party. The commissioners’ staggered five-year terms are set up so that one commissioner’s term ends on June 5th of each year. While the President appoints one of the five commissioners as chairman, he does not have the power to fire any of them without cause.
But according to Donald Trump’s “I can do what I want” theory, all federal agencies fall within his purview. This is why former Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook is suing Trump over her dismissal.
It’s important to point out that, while the Presidency has been gaining strength as more than a coequal branch of government since Ronald Reagan took over, proponents of the Unitary Executive Theory were considered crackpots until relatively recently. Since Trump took office, "(insert Trump illegal action) is not reviewable by the judiciary,” has been the common refrain in lawsuits against the President, essentially arguing that Trump can do what he wants, as long as they can find something in the Constitution to hang it on. Like Article II.
For example, the White House Feb. 18 invoked the article to rationalize an executive order signed that same day that asserted the president’s authority over almost all regulatory agencies that were created by Congress to act independently, or semi-independently, from the president.
Frank Bowman, a scholar of constitutional and criminal law at the University of Missouri School of Law, told Democracy Docket he believes the executive order is a step toward “an open declaration of dictatorship.”
“In essence, what he’s saying is, ‘I am the law. My will is the law. My view of what the law is the only view that can ever be expressed,’” Bowman said.
All of this gets us to yesterday’s SCOTUS argument, in which the six conservative justices sure seemed poised to hand exclusive power over all federal agencies to Trump. The main question in the case before the court is this: Does the President of the United States have the power to fire the members of independent regulatory agencies intended to operate outside Presidential influence?
Here’s how SCOTUSblog saw the oral arguments:
The Supreme Court on Monday morning signaled that it was likely to strike down a federal law that restricts the president’s ability to fire members of the Federal Trade Commission. During two and a half hours of argument in the case of Trump v. Slaughter, a solid majority of the justices appeared to agree with the Trump administration that a law prohibiting the president from firing FTC commissioners except in cases of “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office” violates the constitutional separation of powers between the three branches of government. And although several justices expressed skepticism about a 90-year-old case, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, upholding that law, it was less clear that there was a majority ready to overrule it.
If you’re arguing on the side that wants to go back to a law from 1839, you’re probably not on the right side of history. Not a lot of great things were happening back then.
As I keep saying, our Founding Fathers set up our government to survive someone like Donald Trump. What they did not foresee was both the Supreme Court and the vast majority of Congress rolling over to do his bidding. So, this is not a great development for America. Some decisions need to exist outside of political influence for the good of all.
At least Alina Habba had to resign yesterday.
In other news: Congress tries to corner Pete Hegseth on the boat strike video; Is Kristi Noem on the way out?; Europe isn’t afraid of Elon Musk; and The High Note.
Let’s get into it.
Congress bets Hegseth will back down
For days now, Congress has been calling on Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to release the video of the now-infamous “second strike” boat video, in which the US military went all Kylo Ren on two alleged “naroterrorists” who were clinging to the wreckage of their bombed-out boat, trying not to drown.
Clearly, Congress is not taking Hegseth’s word for it that this was a necessary and reasonable strike, and they’re withholding 25 percent of the Pentagon’s travel funds until they get a look at the full video.
Congress is using its marquee defense bill to force the Pentagon into turning over videos of strikes against suspected drug-smuggling boats off the coast of Latin America.
Lawmakers plan to withhold a quarter of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s travel budget until the Pentagon provides them with the videos. The demand, quietly tucked into the final draft of the annual defense policy bill, calls for “unedited video of strikes conducted against designated terrorist organizations in the area of responsibility of the United States Southern Command” to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees.
***
“If they release the video, then everything that the Republicans are saying will clearly be portrayed to be completely false,” (Rep. Adam Smith, D-WA) said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”
Just days after Trump said he had “no problem” releasing the video, he backtracked yesterday. Now, Trump says he’ll defer to Hegseth’s judgment. Super. Let’s let the guy covered in white nationalist tattoos, accused of both sexual assault and domestic abuse, who (allegedly) repeatedly showed up to work drunk, use his best judgment.
Is Kristi Noem on her way out?
Don’t misinterpret this as me feeling sorry for Kristi Noem — she made her own bed with these jerks — but she clearly couldn’t see that they’d toss her under the bus the first chance they got. The cracks began to show the week before Thanksgiving, when the DOJ stated in a court filing that Noem made the decision to send planes full of undocumented immigrants on to El Salvador, despite a court order telling them to turn around. More on that in a second.
Now, despite all her groveling and kowtowing to the king, rumors are swirling that Noem is about to be fired.
Noem has unquestioningly carried out practically every element of the president’s immigration agenda and endlessly fawned over his leadership. Last week, Noem nonsensically thanked Trump for keeping hurricanes at bay since he returned to office. Yet none of that has been enough to keep her in the administration’s good graces, because even while Trump may be satisfied with her performance, top White House officials have become increasingly frustrated with Noem’s sphere of influence—specifically, the tenure of her chief adviser, Corey Lewandowski, reported The Bulwark.
Three former DHS officials with ties to the current staff told the digital publication that the changeover could happen “really soon,” giving the term-limited (soon-to-be former VA Gov. Glenn) Youngkin a future in Washington.
***
“Things are fucked” at the department, a former staffer relayed on behalf of a current DHS official to The Bulwark. “It’s horrible.”
Things are possibly about to get even worse for Noem, as Judge James Boasberg, who is overseeing the Alien Enemies Act case and is moving forward with a criminal contempt proceeding over DHS’ disregard for his order to turn planes headed to El Salvador around last March, has set a date for criminal contempt testimony, and has ordered DOJ lawyer Drew Ensign (he’s one of the worst of the worst) and Erez Reuveni (who was fired by the DOJ for admitting that Kilmar Abrego Garcia was deported by mistake and turned whistleblower) to testify next week. So far, the party line has been that Noem was informed of the court’s order but decided to send the planes anyway.
Now, Boasberg is escalating his inquiry, ordering live testimony next week.
The judge said the live testimony was necessary because Noem, who made the decision to allow the migrants to continue to be transferred to El Salvador, provided little information about the affair to the court in a sworn statement last week.
This is why you don’t side with the patriarchy, Kristi. Any woman who has ever been the only woman in the room saw this turn of events coming from a mile away. Not that she doesn’t deserve it. Noem is a person who revels in cruelty, and may she get what’s coming to her.
Europe stands up to Elon Musk
I meant to write about this story over the weekend, but it got lost with everything else going on. Still, I think it’s worth mentioning that Europe is willing to do what the US isn’t to rein in Elon Musk’s malign influence:
LONDON (AP) — European Union regulators on Friday fined X, Elon Musk’s social media platform, 120 million euros ($140 million) for breaches of the bloc’s digital regulations, in a move that risks rekindling tensions with Washington over free speech.
The European Commission issued its decision following an investigation it opened two years ago into X under the 27-nation bloc’s Digital Services Act, also known as the DSA.
It’s the first time that the EU has issued a so-called non-compliance decision since rolling out the DSA. The sweeping rulebook requires platforms to take more responsibility for protecting European users and cleaning up harmful or illegal content and products on their sites, under threat of hefty fines.
Musk, of course, reacted in his typically serene manner, calling for the abolition of the EU, even though he probably has $140 million in the cupholder in his car. The platform was fined, per the EU, for “the platform's misleading use of a blue check mark to identify verified users, a poorly functioning advertising repository, and a failure to provide effective data access for researchers.”
The EU said it preferred not to fine Musk but to work with him to bring X into compliance with its standards. But because working and playing nicely with others isn’t something Musk does, here we are. Musk has now responded in kind, banning the EU from advertising on X.
Although I’m cheering on the EU in this one, I'm happy for Musk to turn his focus to those across the pond, instead of, say, a Supreme Court race in Wisconsin. We’ve had more than enough of Musk over here.
The High Note
Each Day, I do my best to leave you with a smile on your face, a song in your heart, and the will to fight another day.
I love crows. I was terrified of them as a kid, but the older and more curmudgeonly I’ve gotten, the more I feel like a crow sitting on my shoulder is exactly what I’m missing in my life. So I found this story thrilling, and I’m trying to figure out how to implement something similar in my backyard. And also to lure a crow familiar to frighten away my enemies.
Crows are being recruited to pick up discarded cigarette butts from the streets and squares of a Swedish city as part of a cost-cutting drive.
The wild birds carry out the task as they receive a little food for every butt that they deposit in a bespoke machine designed by a startup in Södertälje, near Stockholm.
“They are wild birds taking part on a voluntary basis,” said Christian Günther-Hanssen, the founder of Corvid Cleaning, the company behind the method.
The Keep Sweden Tidy Foundation says that more than 1bn cigarette butts are left on Sweden’s streets each year, representing 62% of all litter. Södertälje spends 20m Swedish kronor (£1.6m) on street cleaning.
Günther-Hanssen estimates his method could save at least 75% of costs involved with picking up cigarette butts in the city.
And here’s a video of a crow in Sweden, doing good works of his own volition and reaping tasty rewards for his trouble.
Hey, survive and advance out there today, kids. Don’t let the bastards get you down.
Reply