Judicial Review
Comments
MAJORITY OPINION.—While the Founders are currently already members of the Department of the Treasury, this makes legal sense when the remit of the Department extends to holding the White House Treasury, i.e. "official collection of credits, furniture, and other assets used to fund the White House, held by the members of the “[WH] Founder ID”". But when this remit is changed to "oversee […] the conduct, admission and behavior of Veterans, Very Important Persons, Distinguished Guests and Financial Contributors", this goes on accord with the role of the founders as established in the Constitution.
Article 6, Sections 4 and 5 of the Constitution limits the founders’ role to being "dedicated to monitoring the proper functioning of the legal organs of the White House, as well as maintain rooms as requested by the President" and that they shall "safeguard democracy and the freedom of individuals, as well as uphold the rule of law". While their participation in the Department of the Treasury under the current remit (that is without this amendment) is in line with Article 6, Section 5, their involvement with the Department as proposed in this amendment will not be in line with any of these sections.
Part 4, Section 5(1), Part 5, Section 5(1) and Part 6, Section 5(1) (within respectively schedules 1, 2 and 3) of the Treasury (External Affairs Regulations) Act 2026, however, problematize the founders’ role within the White House. All of these provisions state something along the lines of "[…] Founders reserve[…] the right to, with proper evidence, remove any individual's [Veteran, Distinguished Guest, Very Important Person or Distinguished Guest status] for violation of White House law, rules, and/or convention". And while this can be construed "as upholding the rule of law", these powers are equally delegated to the President and/or the Department of the Treasury (the latter, which would also be unconstitutional, based on the Founders’ inclusion in the Department as a whole). These powers could be delegated to the President, the Executive Office of the President and the Secretary of the Treasury without problem – because these individuals are subject to losing their positions when their roles are abused. Founders, however, are per Article 6, Section 5(1) of the Constitution only subject to appointment and removal by Praeceptor. This differs from membership in the Voting and Electoral Commission, where members, following Article 6, Section 2(1) of the Constitution, "may be removed individually via; the Court after being found guilty of a crime, a petition, or resignation." As such, there is no real legal recourse for founders to be held accountable for any misdeeds, and as such their roles should be limited to what the Constitution prescribes.
Potential fixes to remedy this constitutional problem would be to:
(1) Remove the Founders’ membership of the Department of the Treasury, and instead formulate their treasury-related duties under P1, S2 of the Treasury Act 2025 (treasury in the sense of the collection of credits, furniture and other assets, not the Department).
(2) Remove the Founders’ role in the removal of any statuses regulated under the Act, and instead leave this power with the President and/or the Secretary of the Treasury, potentially also the Executive Office of the President as an example, but keep the role that the Founders may "uphold the rule of law" by executing the physical removal of statuses by way of badge administration for court-mandated removals or removals directed by the President and/or the Secretary of the Treasury – with proper evidence.
WHEREFORE.—The Treasury (External Affairs Regulations) Act 2026 is hereby declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL, and thus shall not take effect.
SO ORDERED.—Associate Justice .Martin delivered the opinion, in which Justices Kelpti, Faaaaiiitthh, Inconclusive-, Brokyy_, and Pawtistic Joined in for approval.