Tranquillus in Exile
New member
Bradley P. Moss is a Washington D.C. attorney specializing in security clearance proceedings. Last month he wrote this opinion:
Trump is considering steps by which clearances can be revoked because “they’ve politicized and, in some cases, monetized their public service and security clearances,” as well as “made baseless accusations of improper contact with Russia or being influenced by Russia against the President.”
In 11 years of representing civilian employees, military personnel, political appointees and government contractors in security clearance proceedings, I can say with certainty that these types of “allegations” are nothing like anything I have ever seen in a memorandum outlining bases for denying or revoking a security clearance.
Moss goes on to outline three different scenarios that might occur:
1. The Standard Process
Trump is unlikely to go down this path because it affords far too much due process for his taste. What’s more, it would require civil servants at the respective agencies to sign off on the paperwork. I can say with a reasonable degree of confidence that those civil servants would not put their names on a document moving to revoke someone’s security clearance for nothing other than bad-mouthing the president on television or writing a book.
2. The National Security Exception to the Standard Process
This is a rarely-used provision that nonetheless is probably far more to Trump’s liking. Again, however, this would necessitate current agency heads such as FBI Director Christopher Wray to attest that it would be inconsistent with national security to afford appeal rights to Comey or McCabe. The odds are not in Trump’s favor that Wray would consent to putting his name on such a document.
3. The Inherent Authority Option
The president could claim the inherent authority to revoke the clearance of each of the individuals without any due process. There is no precedent for such an action, as no president (at least as far as I am aware) has ever personally intervened in the clearance revocation of an individual. That has never happened before because past presidents—whatever their flaws or scandals—knew there were certain institutional norms and customs that a president simply should not disturb.
If the president were to take this unprecedented exercise of his authority, it is anyone’s guess how the courts would construe the issue. It would set up a serious clash of constitutional questions between the inherent authority of the president regarding classified information, the procedural due-process rights of clearance holders under the Fifth Amendment, and the extent to which the judiciary is even permitted to rule on the matter.
As the president would say, we’ll just have to wait and see.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-president-revoke-former-officials-security-clearances
Trump is considering steps by which clearances can be revoked because “they’ve politicized and, in some cases, monetized their public service and security clearances,” as well as “made baseless accusations of improper contact with Russia or being influenced by Russia against the President.”
In 11 years of representing civilian employees, military personnel, political appointees and government contractors in security clearance proceedings, I can say with certainty that these types of “allegations” are nothing like anything I have ever seen in a memorandum outlining bases for denying or revoking a security clearance.
Moss goes on to outline three different scenarios that might occur:
1. The Standard Process
Trump is unlikely to go down this path because it affords far too much due process for his taste. What’s more, it would require civil servants at the respective agencies to sign off on the paperwork. I can say with a reasonable degree of confidence that those civil servants would not put their names on a document moving to revoke someone’s security clearance for nothing other than bad-mouthing the president on television or writing a book.
2. The National Security Exception to the Standard Process
This is a rarely-used provision that nonetheless is probably far more to Trump’s liking. Again, however, this would necessitate current agency heads such as FBI Director Christopher Wray to attest that it would be inconsistent with national security to afford appeal rights to Comey or McCabe. The odds are not in Trump’s favor that Wray would consent to putting his name on such a document.
3. The Inherent Authority Option
The president could claim the inherent authority to revoke the clearance of each of the individuals without any due process. There is no precedent for such an action, as no president (at least as far as I am aware) has ever personally intervened in the clearance revocation of an individual. That has never happened before because past presidents—whatever their flaws or scandals—knew there were certain institutional norms and customs that a president simply should not disturb.
If the president were to take this unprecedented exercise of his authority, it is anyone’s guess how the courts would construe the issue. It would set up a serious clash of constitutional questions between the inherent authority of the president regarding classified information, the procedural due-process rights of clearance holders under the Fifth Amendment, and the extent to which the judiciary is even permitted to rule on the matter.
As the president would say, we’ll just have to wait and see.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-president-revoke-former-officials-security-clearances
Last edited:
Remember the (wink, wink) MUSLIM BAND.....false argument? Want your ass kicked again by real constitutional judges?
There are many FIRSTS under Mr. Trump. That's why he was PLACED by the MILTIARY into power. Think about it. Who really had the power to control an election? Who really has a literal RECORD on every man, woman and child in the United States? Trump's on a mission to clean up the US and take it away from the criminals who are running it. Do you know there are some 40K sealed indictments in the DOJ right now....just waiting for the hammer to be dropped? Do you know the DOJ.....airplane has visited Little Rock.....twice in the past few days, and each time unloaded a shitpile of boxes to the local feds there?