|
Why should it be a surprise to anyone, but David, that government processes be issued in the name of the Head of State, as is done in most every other country in the world.
That, however, does not mean that the court is under the juridiction of the President.
I find the "diminish" argument a bit spurious since it was intended that their salaries could not be reduced by the government during their tenure, as a way of preventing them from being econimically threatened by a congress that disagreed with something one of them did. If the other explanation were truly valid, then they should be living free for life as having to pay for food / rent / mortgage "diminishes" their pay as well, no less so than paying taxes on their earnings. Since the one has never been held, I cannot see that the other has any validity either.
|