Can the president of the United States give security clearance to anyone he wants to?

[Littleman]

@BwanaBob

The whole process is ass-backwards. It should be that if you’re not clearable you should be ineligible for any position requiring clearance. This would include higher office or cabinet positions. What’s the point of having a distinct thought out process if it can be just handwaved.

Seems intuitive, but then a large chunk of our government would have to go just on automatic disqualifiers. Let alone the subjective parts.

Constitution only puts a few basic limits on eligibility for positions. Age, citizenship.

There’s a whole lot of handwaving going on to get elected officials of all sorts clearances.

[Littleman]

On the other hand, a public official doesn’t have the same sort of anonymity a run if tge mill soldier has , so there is a kind of buffer there for security concerns that keeps us from having to really go by the same standards …I guess

[Saint_Cad]

@Shodan

Yes, he can grant clearances to whoever he wants. Congress can investigate him for it if they want. They can also impeach him for it if they want - impeachable offenses don’t have to be illegal.

This is just politics.

Regards,
Shodan

Or the 25th Amendment could be invoked.

[D.E.S.K.Top668]

In a slight hijack, is their any way for any other person or entity to remove somebody’s presidential granted security? Joint Chiefs, maybe Congress?

[MEBuckner]

Congress would raise questions about the separation of powers. The Constitution assigns to the President the powers and responsibilities of Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, and in general there has been a strong tradition of deference to the executive branch in the conduct of military and national security affairs. In terms of the facts of history, security clearances in the United States have been a matter of Executive Orders, and thus under the complete control of the President.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff definitely do not have the authority to override the President of the United States about anything; if it were otherwise, the United States would be perilously close to being a military dictatorship.

[Telemark]

@D.E.S.K.Top668

In a slight hijack, is their any way for any other person or entity to remove somebody’s presidential granted security? Joint Chiefs, maybe Congress?

The next president can do it.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@BwanaBob

The whole process is ass-backwards. It should be that if you’re not clearable you should be ineligible for any position requiring clearance. This would include higher office or cabinet positions. What’s the point of having a distinct thought out process if it can be just handwaved.

That’s as bad an idea as letting elected officials decide who is eligible to vote.

[RTFirefly]

The logic is pretty simple: the President has access to whatever intelligence he feels he needs to make decisions as chief executive. It really wouldn’t work any other way.

And being President, he can share that intel with whoever he chooses. Being able to grant security clearances to whoever he chooses is basically a formalization of that.

As Shodan says, Congress can investigate the use of that intel by the President and his subordinates, to ensure that he/they aren’t giving away the store to Russia/Saudi Arabia/Turkey/UAE/whoever. And can impeach him if he/they are doing just that.