How to fire Mueller? Change the rules.

The Supreme Court is set to hear a seemingly minor case later this month on the status of administrative judges at the Securities and Exchange Commission, an issue that normally might only draw the interest of those accused of stock fraud.

But the dispute turns on the president's power to hire and fire officials throughout the government.

[...]

Trump's Solicitor Gen. Noel Francisco intervened in the SEC case to urge the high court to clarify the president's constitutional power to fire all "officers of the United States" who "exercise significant authority" under the law.

"The Constitution gives the president what the framers saw as the traditional means of ensuring accountability: the power to oversee executive officers through removal," he wrote in Lucia vs. SEC. "The president is accordingly authorized under our constitutional system to remove all principal officers, as well as all 'inferior officers' he has appointed."

  LA Times

I think we all know who the inferior officer is here.

The justices said they would focus only on how the SEC in-house judges are appointed. But Francisco is asking them to go further and rule on the "removal" issue.

[...]

In addition to representing the administration before the Supreme Court, Francisco, a former law clerk for the late Justice Antonin Scalia, could be in line to oversee the Mueller inquiry if Deputy Atty. Gen. Rod Rosenstein is fired.

[...]

Francisco points to two provisions of the Constitution as giving the president very broad authority. One says the president shall appoint ambassadors, judges and "all other officers of United States." The other says the president "shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed."

[...]

Francisco's defense of broad presidential power is likely to win favor with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and the court's other conservatives. In 2010, Roberts spoke for a 5-4 majority that struck down a provision in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which created an independent public accounting board at the SEC whose members could be fired only for "good cause."

Roberts said shielding these "officers of the United States" from presidential control was unconstitutional.

[...]

On Friday the court agreed to Francisco's request to participate in the April 23 argument so he can advocate for a ruling on the president's removal power.

I'd like to put a question to those justices - in particular, Justice Roberts. Are they themselves considered "officers of the United States" and, if so, how do they feel about any future president having the power to fire them at will?

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.