Stephen Miller Invites John Roberts to be the Instrument of His Own Destruction
I meant to write this post last week; I meant to argue that a Stephen Miller-related effort to FOIA the US Courts could be more significant development than Trump’s refusal to tell Kristen Welker he would adhere to the Constitution because he will instead do what “the lawyers” — probably including non-lawyer Stephen Miller among them — tell him to do.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But even given those numbers that you’re talking about, don’t you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States as president?
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
I don’t know. I have to respond by saying, again, I have brilliant lawyers that work for me, and they are going to obviously follow what the Supreme Court said. What you said is not what I heard the Supreme Court said. They have a different interpretation.
It didn’t happen. I didn’t write the post.
But the delay proved useful, because the firings of the Librarian of Congress and the Register of Copyrights reflect yet another step in the same process that — I suspect — the lawsuit could one day join.
For all the chaos of the Trump term, after some initial missteps, Trump has preceded relentlessly to use presidential firings to remap government agencies over which the Executive is supposed to have limited or no influence. There has been a certain logical progression. Trump started with agencies entirely within the Executive (like USAID), then proceeded to boards and agencies designed to be independent (starting with the Special Counsel and Merit Systems Protection Board, effectively stripping federal employees of key protections, then moving onto the Federal Elections Commission, the Consumer Financial Protection Board, and the Federal Trade Commission, and more recently the Consumer Product Safety Commission). DOGE then started swallowing up independent agencies, like the US African Development Foundation and the Institute for Peace, before moving onto Radio Free Europe and the Postal Service.
Those efforts are all stuck in various stages of legal challenges. Their takeover may not succeed.
But after moving through independent agencies, Trump has turned to an agency of Congress, the Library of Congress, all without even telling Republicans he was coming.
Trump’s firing of the librarian, in particular, was so sudden that the move caught several of his Republican allies on Capitol Hill off guard, according to the two sources, with some GOP lawmakers who help conduct oversight of the Library of Congress unaware that the White House was going to do it; they learned about the firings in the media and elsewhere.
We’re just days into the latest escalation and thus far at least, Congress has prevented replacement staffers from taking over the Copyright Office.
Two men claiming to be newly appointed Trump administration officials tried to enter the US Copyright Office in Washington, DC on Monday, but left before gaining access to the building, sources tell WIRED. Their appearance comes days after the White House fired the director of the copyright office, Shira Perlmutter, who had held the job since 2020. Perlmutter was removed from her post on Saturday, one day after the agency released a report that raised concerns about the legality in certain cases of using copyrighted materials to train artificial intelligence.
[snip]
The US Copyright Office is a government agency within the Library of Congress that administers the nation’s copyright laws. It processes applications to copyright creative works and maintains a searchable database of existing registrations. Last week, the Trump administration also fired the Librarian of Congress, Carla Hayden, who was the first woman and the first Black person to hold the position.
The document the two men cited also stated that deputy attorney general Todd Blanche, who previously served as a personal defense lawyer for Trump, was now the acting Librarian of Congress. The Department of Justice announced Monday that Blanche would be replacing Hayden, who had been in the job for nearly a decade. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Hayden’s firing stemmed from “quite concerning things she had done at the Library of Congress in pursuit of DEI.”
Ranking House Committee on Administration Member Joe Morelle has asked the Inspector General to investigate whether this breached Congress’ independence. Politico claims Republicans might object to this — but that’s based off a feckless comment from John Thune (and none from Mike Johnson).
Senate Majority Leader John Thune said in a brief interview that congressional leaders “want to make sure we’re following precedent and procedure” in naming a replacement for Carla Hayden, the Librarian of Congress whom Trump dismissed Thursday.
Thus far, no one has sued, but it often takes a few days to do so.
We’re still just at Day One on Trump’s attempt to take over two entities of Congress, with still more entities — like the Congressional Budget Office or Government Accountability Office, the latter of which is two months into a review of DOGE — Trump might want to undercut next.
In the past such an approach has succeeded in persuading even sympathetic judges that the President can use such firings to remake government. And the assault on Congressional entities matches the model used before: the White House fires someone appointed by the President (in this case, Congressional Librarian Carla Hayden), and then proceeds to claim authority to totally remap the agency, in significant part because it acts like an agency and courts, including SCOTUS, have said the President has unitary authority over agencies.
If that logic were to continue, it would be unsurprising to see Trump attempt a similar method with the Administrative Office of the US Courts. Indeed, DOGE has already probed the limits of Article III authority by including the Courts in the weekly DOGE email, the firing of GSA staffers who maintain Phoenix’s courthouse, and the attempted exclusion of law firms from federal properties, which would include courts.
TPM’s Josh Kovensky, who first reported this aspect of the lawsuit [docket], included some of these examples to demonstrate what he describes (with justification) as an escalating campaign to erode the independence of the judiciary.
The executive branch has tried to encroach on the power of the judiciary in other ways too, prompting a degree of consternation and alarm unusual for the normally-staid Administrative Office of U.S. Courts. As TPM has documented, DOGE has already caused disorder at the courts and sent out mass emails to judges and other judiciary employees demanding a list of their recent accomplishments. Per one recent report in the New York Times, federal judges have expressed concern that Trump could direct the U.S. Marshals Service — an executive branch agency tasked with protecting judges and carrying out court orders — to withdraw protection.
These are all facets of an escalating campaign to erode the independence of the judiciary, experts told TPM. The lawsuit demonstrates another prong of it: close allies of the president are effectively asking the courts to rule that they should be managed by the White House.
It’s on the basis that experts Kovensky quotes dismiss the seriousness of this challenge, again, with good justification.
“It’s like using an invalid legal claim to taunt the judiciary,” Anne Joseph O’Connell, a professor at Stanford University Law School, told TPM.
“To the extent this lawsuit has any value other than clickbait, maybe the underlying message is, we will let our imaginations run wild,” Peter M. Shane, a constitutional law scholar at NYU Law School, told TPM. “The Trump administration and the MAGA community will let our imaginations run wild in our attempts to figure out ways to make the life of the judiciary miserable, to the extent you push back against Trump.”
But against the background of the relentless assault on agencies of government, independent or not, the argument looks very familiar. America First Legal Foundation — Stephen Miller’s NGO, his affiliation with which unserious people sometimes mistake Miller for a lawyer — situates its argument in Sheldon Whitehouse’s efforts to crack down on Clarence Thomas and Sammy Alito’s open corruption. Because the Judicial Conference and Administrative Office of the Courts responded to oversight requests from Whitehouse, along with Hank Johnson, AFLF argues, it makes them Executive Agencies.
5. The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are central levers for Senator Whitehouse and Representative Johnson’s lawfare enterprise. The Conference and the Administrative Office have actively accommodated oversight requests from these congressmen concerning their allegations against Justices Thomas and Alito. Under our constitutional tradition, accommodations with Congress are the province of the executive branch. The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are therefore executive agencies. Such agencies must be overseen by the President, not the courts. Judicial relief here not only preserves the separation of powers but also keeps the courts out of politics.
The Judicial Conference is doing agency stuff, and therefore must be supervised by the Executive Branch, the lawsuit contends.
7. The federal judiciary is the system of courts. These courts are made up of judges who preside over cases and controversies. The executive branch, on the other hand, is responsible for taking care that the laws are faithfully executed and ensuring the proper functioning of the government. Federal courts rely on the executive branch for facility management and security. Federal judges, as officers of the courts, need resources to fulfill their constitutional obligations.
8. Courts definitively do not create agencies to exercise functions beyond resolving cases or controversies or administratively supporting those functions. But the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts does exactly that. The Administrative Office is controlled by the Judicial Conference, headed by the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, John Roberts. The Administrative Office is run by an officer appointed by—and subject to removal by—Chief Justice Roberts. 28 U.S.C. § 601.
9. Congress cannot constitutionally delegate to an officer improperly appointed pursuant to Article II powers exceeding those that are informative and investigative in nature. Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 137–39 (1976).
10. The Judicial Conference’s duties are executive functions and must be supervised by executive officers who are appointed and accountable to other executive officers. United States v. Arthrex, Inc., 594 U.S. 1, 6 (2021) (Officers who engage in executive functions and are not nominated by the President “must be directed and supervised by an officer who has been.”).
11. Thus, the Judicial Conference and Administrative Office exercise executive functions and are accordingly subject to FOIA. Accordingly, their refusal to comply with AFL’s FOIA request is unlawful.
This is packaged up as a FOIA lawsuit. The entire argument — which should be that the Judicial Conference is an agency and therefore must respond to a FOIA — is presented in reverse, so that the outrageous claims about Article III are the primary argument. But it also lays out precisely the kind of argument we’ve seen used to rationalize the takeover of agencies Congress set up to be independent.
As of right now, Trevor McFadden, the Trumpiest DC District Judge (in my experience McFadden also fiercely guards judicial prerogaties), has been assigned the case. On Friday he invited calls from the parties to ask for his recusal.
[T]he undersigned is a member of the Judicial Conference’s Committee on Court Administration and Case Management (CACM). Any party wishing to submit a recusal motion on that basis must do so on or before the due date for Defendants’ Answer.
Like virtually all other legal challenges, it will take some time to see where this will go.
I’m not saying this lawsuit — a naked attempt to get a judge to say that judges’ own infrastructure must be relegated to the Executive Branch, susceptible to takeover just like the Institute of Peace or Radio Free Europe — will succeed.
I’m saying that it adopts the very same pattern that has been used to subsume independent agencies, the same pattern used in recent days in an assault on Congress’ prerogatives.
It’s possible the lawsuit, which named John Roberts as a defendant, will clue SCOTUS in to the use to which Stephen Miller’s minions plan to put Supreme Court precedent, including Roberts’ own fondness for the unitary executive. Notably, Roberts’ comments on the import of judicial independence came after this lawsuit was filed, after former subordinates of Trump’s top advisor argued that the Executive must takeover Article III’s bastions of independence.
Roberts, speaking at a public event in Buffalo, New York, said an independent judiciary is a key feature of the U.S. constitutional system that had not existed in other countries when it was founded.
“In our Constitution … the judiciary is a co-equal branch of government, separate from the others, with the authority to interpret the Constitution as law and strike down, obviously, acts of Congress or acts of the president,” he said.
“And that innovation doesn’t work if … the judiciary is not independent,” he added. “Its job is to, obviously, decide cases but, in the course of that, check the excesses of Congress or the executive, and that does require a degree of independence.”
Roberts repeated his concern about the courts yesterday.
So maybe this purported FOIA challenge was a strategically stupid move by Miller’s crowd, showing their hands prematurely to the guy most able to swap cards. Or maybe they took it as a deniable first probe into whether they could use with the courts the same tactic used to dismantle the independence of much of the rest of federal government.
None of us know how this will work out. It might just happen that, by alerting Roberts that he’s next, after Trump finishes off the Institute of Peace and the Library of Congress, Roberts will look more critically at Trump’s arguments in those legal fights, knowing full well that rubber stamping Executive authority may rubber stamp the takeover of the courts, or at least the courthouses, the same way he might look differently at the commission firings knowing that Jerome Powell might be next.
But this is, in my opinion, more than just a troll, more than just an attempt to bully judges. This certainly looks like a test to see whether Miller’s minions can extend their thus far successful takeover plan to encompass the judiciary itself.
Update: In a piece on the Library of Congress firing, Daniel Schuman concludes,
Trump likely can fire the Librarian of Congress. Trump likely cannot appoint an interim replacement. Trump cannot hire or fire subordinates. Congress must provide Robert Newlen support as he protects the independence of the Library of Congress and its ability to serve all members of Congress.
In his own post on it, Chris Geidner reviews some of the precedents.
The Urinating Executive is taking the exploratory piss using Steven Miller’s America’s FUBAR Legal Foundation. Hard to see how Roberts won’t punch back, with some very non-frivolous fire-hosings of his own. He may even get Gorsuch to stand with him, along with Kavanaugh and Barrett and the Dem ladies. This is existential territory for them, possibly forcing them to see themselves in the same boat with the rest of US government and its populace under Trump’s monarchic/dictatorial assault — and to completely rethink their entire UE concept and framework.
Still and all, it will be a surprise if they do so, despite the obvious necessity for their own non-meaningless viability going forward. They built this flaming shithouse, after all.
You could make the same argument about Congress, and look how that is panning out. They should be concerned about the Executive usurping the power of the purse, but are largely content. Like all Republicans, Roberts disapproves of the methods but is fine with the goals. Maybe that’s enough for him.
I don’t think Roberts is “fine” with the goal in this case. He’s already said he believes the judiciary must be independent. If that is the case, it seems to me unlikely he will try to parse efforts to achieve that goal, by approving small nibbles here and there. That would be like expecting him to be just a little bit of an apostate, in re: the belief. For believers, there can never be a half of an apostasy. Usually, it’s all or nothing.
Or so I hope.
IMHO, the only question is when does Robert, Alito and some of the others realize that The Beast is now eyeing them for its next meal.
Right now they’ve let things go way farther than I would have, discounting any ideology save self-interest.
Roberts is WAY less beholden to Trump and the MAGA throng than elected members of the House, so the situation is different. Maybe. I have no idea what motivates him.
I’m sure lots of shit motivates him, as with all humans, but one thing I’m sure is on that list is his place in History, with a capital H.
That, in the end, could be his tipping point.
Administrative agencies are kind of unicorns, not having any Constitutional mention, but things like the Whiskey Rebellion prove their early existence.
Much festing in court over agency action in the past has been over a claim of limited Legislative delegation of power, even wrongful delegation, or an agency exceeding its delegated powers
As best as I understand things Congress creates and delegates, the executive oversees administration especially personnel decisions, and where consent of Congress is needed or not is fuzzy.
The rough idea of the powers being Congressional and not Executive is in simple terms laid out: https://constitution.findlaw.com/article1/annotation03.html -and- https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-1/04-delegation-legislative-power.html — with any lawyer-reader practicing administrative law knowing far more – leading cases, etc.
But it helps to grasp and argue that the agencies are at heart running delegated Legislative Branch power, with the Executive Branch being the administrative regulator. I.e., legislative preeminence being key as to policy and intent of agency bounds and powers. As I understand things.
You: “… and where consent of Congress is needed or not is fuzzy.”
Congress can at any time sharpen that focus, and in many directions, if the will arrives in time. The giant flying penis from Qatar may have prodded some Rs to fiddle with the focus knob, from what I’m hearing. Has JD Vance gotten himself behind the blast radius of that stink bomb?
“The Urinating Executive…”
Not to gross anyone out further than they already are, but having a father residing in the memory wing of an assisted living facility exhibiting textbook dementia symptoms, I suspect that the foul odors reportedly emanating from that so-called “executive” may not be urine at all.
“8. Courts definitively do not create agencies to exercise functions beyond resolving cases or controversies or administratively supporting those functions. But the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts does exactly that.”
Doesn’t this derail AFLF’s entire argument? They acknowledge that courts are empowered to “administratively support” their judicial functions, which is…exactly what the Administrative Office does.
They have a bad case of cognitive dissonance.
If we’re lucky, it’s terminal.
IANAL, but the “create agencies” seems to be the operative phrase. In classic Trump MO, it’s “the card says MOOPS!” because “SEE! IT SAYS ADMINISTRATIVE! CHECKMATE LIBS!”, again attempting an end run around Congressional power.
i’m saving reading this for dessert, and so i can share a link to a declaration by counsel in CALIFORNIA, the case from which it appears has become one of my all-time favorites. such stuff i have learned ! thank you, marcy, for forcing me to stop everything, and eat lunch so i can have DESSERT … oh boy it’s gonna be goooooooood.
link i forgot:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.448664/gov.uscourts.cand.448664.36.0.pdf
Oh boy. Robert’s going with “The notion that rule of law governs is the basic proposition”, after he allowed the President to be immune to laws is a bit rich.
I suppose he had his permanent smirk on while delivering these remarks.
“The notion that rule of law governs is the basic proposition, except for Donald Trump, who is a Very Special Boy and gets to crime as much as he wants!”
Very special, plus the fact that he can instigate a dangerous, violent mob with just his twitter thumbs.
Nearly the entire GOP cowers to that power.
I’m sure that he wants a situation where any GOP President has massive, king-like powers, but in the end SCOTUS ran rein him in at will.
To me, the trick is that ‘king-like powers’ include over courts.
The big picture you paint here is consistent with the notion that Donald Trump and whoever is pulling his strings really are attempting an authoritarian/autocratic/fascist/or-whatever-one-might-want-to-call-it takeover of the American government. And they know what they are doing. And they are being strategic.
Is that the case? We can’t see what is in their minds but we can see their actions. And, thanks to your journalism, Marcy, we can see the pattern. Thank you for that.
Roberts opened up Pandora’s box with Citizens United and immunity to Trump enabling an extortionist and an exploiter of humanity.
When I read of the Library of Congress and the copyright maneuvers I read it as the opening assault on governmental branches that provide analysis and data, so that eventually the books will be cooked to the administration’s liking on any topic, legislative or executive, as the administration desires. Let us hope not, but ….
Sadly, I think you are right. Also, historical documents will be destroyed that show how unconstitutional, unprecedented, and contrary to the founding ideas of the United States the actions of this administration are. We are seeing the erasure of this country as we have known it, in real time.
Historians see this and know it for what it is. We will be next.
They are trying to cook the books like Trump cooked his financial statements.
It is what they mean by “the end of history”. If you can erase history, you can invent your own, which then becomes fable. It is a rather large undertaking, which is why Musk and Palantir are sweeping up everything to feed into their AI project.
This is the implementation of Project 2025, step by step. They planed the work and are working the plan.
Where is the progressive Project 2029: Return to the Rule of Law?
It took large numbers of regressives to create the P 2025 document, each one working on a different aspect of replacing the democratic republic and social safety net with the rule of the jungle (and money).
Based on the number of people from across the spectrum: from former Republicans to Sanders Social Democrats, there should be sufficient authors to take on the tasks of formulating a plan to recover from the attack of the oligarchs.
There needs to be a focal point, a organizational structure that can coordinates the efforts of how to recover, how to bring to justice the lawbreakers and how to inoculate against the next attempt to overthrow the U.S. Constitution.
Plan the work, work the plan; but first there needs to be a plan.
JJH
“Where is the progressive Project 2029: Return to the Rule of Law?”
You know what pisses me off about comments like this? Invariably the person making them has done dick-all to launch such an effort let alone participated in the effort.
Where are you helping to do this, or are you just waiting for a great white savior to drop such a plan in your social media feed?
I’m waiting for the Inner Party Dems to act. They have the power to be heard. I don’t. They define issue positions. We’re not e.g., Brookings with its Dem friendly think tank expertise. Don’t criticize the little guys getting squeezed.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m working with $ORGANIZATION in my town and I’m on a couple of the committees. I’ve also been protesting regularly.
Re: Morelle’s letter to the IG, which Geidner also links to in his thorough piece [Marcy’s Update]:
… neither of those links works for me.
Here’s Morelle’s press release [HIS link to the letter doesn’t work either!]:
Ranking Member Morelle Leads Request to Library of Congress Inspector General into Improper Communications, Potential Unauthorized Transfer of Congressional Data to Trump Administration https://democrats-cha.house.gov/media/press-releases/ranking-member-morelle-leads-request-library-congress-inspector-general May 12, 2025
This is exactly what I was talking about in my reply to Attygmgm – the unauthorized transfer of documents to the executive branch. Then those documents deemed inconvenient to the Trump/Vought/ Miller project will be disappeared. If they can do it to human beings – and clearly they ARE doing it to human beings – they can do it to documents.
By now, Roberts and McConnell have to realize that they made huge mistakes; mistakes that threaten America’s continued existence. Their admitting their mistakes would be timely; might help. It’s too bad that neither are capable of doing so.
Today’s Heather Cox Richardson:
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/may-12-2025
Something I wrote back in March:
https://kenmelvin.substack.com/p/the-supreme-court
Apparently the Library of Congress is under the judicial branch (this should be confirmed), in an attempt by the Founders to keep politics out of Congressional research. When Leavitt complained that 16-year-olds were checking out inappropriate books it was a lie on its face (only Members of Congress can check out anything) and when the librarians told the DoJ minions to pack sand and called the cops this week, it was a signal they understood their role.
There’s a joint House/Senate commitee that has operational oversight over LoC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congressional_Joint_Committee_on_the_Library
Their page at House dot gov:
https://cha.house.gov/joint-committee-on-library
Some other things that may be of interest:
1. While not at the AFLF with Stephen Miller, Pam Bondi did serve as chair of the Center for Litigation at the America First Policy Institute (AFPI). The AFPI had/has its own very specific plan of action, very much like Project 2025, including personnel who moved into the current administration.
2. The Library of Congress has a Trust Fund Board. On May 28, 2020, Trump appointed Ginni Thomas to that board. If she is no longer there, she may, nevertheless, still have an interest. And remember, she was very active in recommending personnel changes during Trump’s 1st administration.
3. Ginni’s friend, Martha-Ann Alito, has a degree in library science. She and Sam met while she was a librarian in the US attorney’s office in Newark, New Jersey.
4. Laura Bush was also a librarian, fwiw.
5. Robert Newlen has valuable experience in multiple areas. It may still be up-in-the-air about whether or not he is Acting Librarian of Congress. But if he is, at least theoretically, as such he may be able to appoint his own deputy. What if he appoints Carla Hayden, and then he resigns? Would she be able to be Acting Librarian of Congress?
These are really interesting points, SL! Thank you!
Hello, Dr. Wheeler:
My apologies if this question seems impertinent (I feel Stephen Miller’s “habeas corpus” comments tie in), but as of tomorrow, May 14, two months will have passed since you wrote the following in your March 14 article entitled “DEMOCRATS HAVE TO STOP MAKING POLITICAL DECISIONS WITH AN EYE TOWARDS 2026,” specifically:
“Democracy will be preserved or lost in the next three months.”
With one month left to go, has any thing (or things) occurred that would lead you to either increase, maintain or compress this timeline?
Additionally, I’d like to extend a sincere thank you to you and your staff for your tireless efforts to help the very cause of democracy.
It’s a good question. I’ve been contemplating doing an assessment.
The good things:
Take down Tesla has done a lot of good
The tariffs will be felt as the GOP likely fails to pass their budget
A few things — the bribery plane and the assault on LoC — are genuinely backfiring
Things to work on
We need to use the bad press of Tesla take down to rebrand DOGE as a fraud
We need to run the same kind of campaign against Stephen Miller
We need to move from outrage (Trump kidnapped that nice grad student to opposition to policies (actually, immigration is good)
The obtuse comment Trump made about how great it is we “aren’t losing money” when the ports are empty is going to come back to haunt him. It is going to seriously break through the otherwise compartmentalized thoughts of the money-power: “That’s THEIR revenue stream to dip their beaks in, Donald! How dare you turn the spigot off! ”
Shades of wasting Federal water by the billions of gallons that will later screw farmers, because spigots.
House Rule 9 has been invoked. Michigan Rep. Shir Thandra presented Impeachment Articles must come to a vote by end of Thursday. The general political consensus is the impeachment of Donald J. trump is not “ripe” yet. Apparently, wise minds in Congress are waiting until the issue is rotten.
@ Palli Davis Holubar:
“Apparently,” there’s a fine line between locating your personal comfort level with badly executed fascism, and societal collapse. One must use finesse — and purchase a Cayman Islands fortress of solitude with one’s bitcoin windfall.~
I’ve always had great admiration for Librarians – I’ve been friends with several, over the years. And of course I have a “thing” for poets!! See below the copy/paste for the poem.
Here’s a factoid from WIki: Library of Congress
In 1939, following Putnam’s retirement, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed poet and writer Archibald MacLeish as his successor. Occupying the post from 1939 to 1944 during the height of World War II, MacLeish became the most widely known librarian of Congress in the library’s history. MacLeish encouraged librarians to oppose totalitarianism on behalf of democracy; dedicated the South Reading Room of the Adams Building to Thomas Jefferson, and commissioned artist Ezra Winter to paint four themed murals for the room. He established a “democracy alcove” in the Main Reading Room of the Jefferson Building for essential documents such as the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and The Federalist Papers. The Library of Congress assisted during the war effort, ranging from storage of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution in Fort Knox for safekeeping to researching weather data on the Himalayas for Air Force pilots. MacLeish resigned in 1944 when appointed as Assistant Secretary of State.
…No replacement of Hayden has been nominated. (as of 05/12/2025)
Ars Poetica
By Archibald MacLeish
A poem should be palpable and mute
As a globed fruit,
Dumb
As old medallions to the thumb,
Silent as the sleeve-worn stone
Of casement ledges where the moss has grown—
A poem should be wordless
As the flight of birds.
*
A poem should be motionless in time
As the moon climbs,
Leaving, as the moon releases
Twig by twig the night-entangled trees,
Leaving, as the moon behind the winter leaves,
Memory by memory the mind—
A poem should be motionless in time
As the moon climbs.
*
A poem should be equal to:
Not true.
For all the history of grief
An empty doorway and a maple leaf.
For love
The leaning grasses and two lights above the sea—
A poem should not mean
But be.
Copyright Credit: Archibald MacLeish, “Ars Poetica” from Collected Poems 1917-1982. Copyright © 1985 by The Estate of Archibald MacLeish. Reprinted with the permission of Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Source: Poetry (June 1926)
That’s a beautiful poem!