This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/18/opinion/jared-kushners-appointment-is-legal.html
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Jared Kushner’s Appointment Is Legal | Jared Kushner’s Appointment Is Legal |
(about 1 hour later) | |
To the Editor: | To the Editor: |
Re “Mr. Trump Keeps It in the Family” (editorial, Jan. 13): | Re “Mr. Trump Keeps It in the Family” (editorial, Jan. 13): |
I take issue with your editorial with respect to the legality of Jared Kushner’s service in the White House. | I take issue with your editorial with respect to the legality of Jared Kushner’s service in the White House. |
A decade after the anti-nepotism law was passed, Congress authorized the president to “appoint … employees in the White House Office without regard to any other provision of law regulating the employment … of persons in the Government service.” The House and the Senate said that this measure gave the president “total discretion in the employment … of all employees in the White House Office.” | A decade after the anti-nepotism law was passed, Congress authorized the president to “appoint … employees in the White House Office without regard to any other provision of law regulating the employment … of persons in the Government service.” The House and the Senate said that this measure gave the president “total discretion in the employment … of all employees in the White House Office.” |
The appointment of Jared Kushner, President-elect Donald Trump’s son-in-law, as a White House senior adviser is clearly lawful under this authority. | The appointment of Jared Kushner, President-elect Donald Trump’s son-in-law, as a White House senior adviser is clearly lawful under this authority. |
In addition, it is not only “lawyers for Mr. Trump and Mr. Kushner” who have concluded that the anti-nepotism law does not apply to the White House Office. Two well-respected members of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia expressed that view in a published opinion, after the Clinton Justice Department advocated for the very same reading of the nepotism law. | In addition, it is not only “lawyers for Mr. Trump and Mr. Kushner” who have concluded that the anti-nepotism law does not apply to the White House Office. Two well-respected members of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia expressed that view in a published opinion, after the Clinton Justice Department advocated for the very same reading of the nepotism law. |
JAMIE S. GORELICK | JAMIE S. GORELICK |
Washington | |
The writer is counsel to Mr. Kushner. | The writer is counsel to Mr. Kushner. |
Previous version
1
Next version