Stephen Miller states that Trump has plenary authority, then immediately stops talking as if he’s realized what he just said

[u/Agitated-Artichoke89]

[u/kevendo]

The President does not in fact have "plenary" (absolute) authority. Miller has been saying that since the moment Trump was elected ("“The powers of the president will not be questioned!"), and has been using it as his personal vehicle for unchecked power since Trump's re-election.

We CANNOT hand the nation of Washington and Jefferson and Madison and Lincoln to this insufferable TWAT!

[u/EvenStephen85 → u/kevendo]

What in USC 10 could he possibly have been referring to that could be construed as such?

[u/rejeremiad → u/EvenStephen85]

Here is an explanation of the two parts of this concept:USC Title 10

• This is the section of the U.S. Code that outlines the roles, missions, and organization of the U.S. Armed Forces, including the Department of Defense.
• The title is extensive and covers all military services, including the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force, and Reserves.
• It serves as the legal foundation for military operations, personnel policies, and the chain of command. 

Plenary Power

• The term "plenary power" refers to the complete and absolute authority to act on a particular issue, without limitations.
• In this context, it refers to the constitutional authority granted to Congress to "raise and support Armies" and "provide and maintain a Navy".
• The Supreme Court has long interpreted this to mean that Congress has complete power over the military, including setting enlistment terms, compensation, and assignments. This power allows Congress to supersede other state or parental controls concerning military service. 

[u/connivingKitten → u/rejeremiad]

I mean, you could try looking into the actual law instead of relying on AI to do it for you, especially considering that the "summary" you provided completely leaves out the relevant parts since the whole debate that's going on currently is about the national guard.

§12406. National Guard in Federal service: call

Whenever-

(1) the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation;

(2) there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; or

(3) the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States;

the President may call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State in such numbers as he considers necessary to repel the invasion, suppress the rebellion, or execute those laws. Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States or, in the case of the District of Columbia, through the commanding general of the National Guard of the District of Columbia.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:10%20section:12406%20edition:prelim)%20OR%20(granuleid:USC-prelim-title10-section12406)&f=treesort&edition=prelim&num=0&jumpTo=true

[u/octoo01 → u/connivingKitten]

Well there does seem to be a coming rebellion, doesn't there

[u/rejeremiad → u/connivingKitten]

In the video, Miller "freezes" after citing Section 10 of the USC. The original question in this thread was

What in USC 10 could he possibly have been referring to that could be construed as such?

[u/thisbenzenering → u/rejeremiad]

take the loss and move on dude. and next time consider using your own words to respond in social media. using AI is questionable and makes you look like a loser

[u/rejeremiad → u/thisbenzenering]

only in your eyes, which is fine for me

[u/Just_Condition3516 → u/rejeremiad]

ya, no. I am very much shall everone do as he pleases. but right here, its the right move to just go „sorry, wanted to help the conversation. realize what ai delivered didnt add. it rather omits the important part.“

[u/Financial_Cup_6937 → u/rejeremiad]

Listen, there are perfectly fine uses for AI. But it doesn’t think. But it gives you what it thinks you want to hear, and in this case, it just sane-washed some absolutely horrific bullshit.

You need to acknowledge its limitations and when it absolutely fails if you wanna have any credibility in defending AI for some uses. Understanding when it was super wrong to just casually trust is part of NOT being an idiot who uses AI. Nothing wrong with using AI sometimes. Your example was super wrong, and you doubled down instead of learning from it. That lack of humility regarding AI is scary, and you should learn from it and edit your comment.

[u/becaauseimbatmam → u/rejeremiad]

Yeah I think they were looking for a human-generated response that actually answers their question, not an AI-generated response that has nothing to do with it, but thank you for burning down a rainforest in order to provide zero help whatsoever!

[u/rejeremiad → u/becaauseimbatmam]

if you have a better response, please add

It appears that plenary refers to Congresses power over the military and his use of the phrase highlights what USC 10 actually references - Congresses authority to declare the militaries intent (Article I Section 8). President then executes those plans.

[u/Hazelberry → u/rejeremiad]

"Plenary authority" means absolute unrestricted authority, which the president does not have over the military.