White House aide Stephen Miller has whipped up a flurry of conspiracies after appearing to freeze live on-air while mentioning President Donald Trump having “plenary authority”.
The seeming gaffe took place when Miller — who serves as the White House Deputy Chief of Staff — was being interviewed about the administration deploying the National Guard in Portland, Oregon.
While being grilled by CNN’s Boris Sanchez about the president’s decision to mobilise troops in the city — supposedly in response to violence and crime — Miller cited Title 10 of the US Code, saying the “president has plenary authority -” before stopping short of completing the sentence.
The snippet promptly went viral not only for Miller’s abrupt pause — which Sanchez chalked down to technical difficulties — but for the controversial mention of plenary authority and the ramifications that the assertion holds.
What is plenary power?
Plenary authority refers to a single government official having total power on a particular matter. Per the Cornell Law School, it means an official, like the president, has “complete power… with no limitations”, which raises concerns not only in terms of the constitution, but in the context in which Miller mentioned it.
Miller’s suggestion of Trump having plenary power seems to go against the constitution’s principle of the “separation of powers”, which is designed to prevent unchecked power in the US by dispersing it over the legislative branch (Congress), the judicial branch (the Supreme Court) and the executive branch (the White House).
Why is Trump deploying the national guard in US cities?
In the context of the National Guard, Trump having plenary power would, under Title 10 of the US Code, allow him to mobilise troops in cities like Portland if he believes that “rebellion against the United States make it impracticable to enforce the laws” via usual means.
It’s a justification the Trump administration has used before — both when mobilising troops in response to protests in California back in June, and later in Washington DC in response to what Trump called a “situation of complete and total lawlessness” in the city.
In both those cases, Trump’s use of the National Guard was met with rulings from federal judges saying the conditions for deployment were not met and that such moves were unwarranted. It was those rulings that Miller was responding to when he mentioned Trump’s “plenary power” to mobilise troops in Portland.
So does Trump have plenary power?
Naturally, Miller’s abrupt pause after saying “plenary power” — a term often associated with dictatorships — set the internet alight with conspiracies that Miller had said the quiet part out loud as to the Trump administration’s intentions.
But, as mentioned, the constitution’s separation of powers means Trump does not have plenary power… so long as the constitution is being followed.
When Sanchez cut to commercial during what he believed was a “technical issue” after Miller’s pause, the pair returned for the interview — and Miller made no mention of plenary power again.
“I was making the point that under federal law, Section Title 10 of the US Code, the president has the authority anytime he believes federal resources are insufficient, to federalise the National Guard to carry out a mission necessary for public safety,” Miller said.
The implications of Miller’s original statement are potentially dangerous, but since the Trump administration has a knack for flooding the zone with increasingly puzzling manoeuvres, it unfortunately won’t be long before a new headline drowns out Miller’s initial sentiment.
And that, folks, might be the most frightening thing of all.
Lead images: Getty Images, CNN and X
The post What Is Plenary Power & Does Donald Trump Have It? CNN Slip-Up Sparks Concerns appeared first on PEDESTRIAN.TV .
