During 2020 and 2021, I thought of Anthony Fauci having three basic jobs. He directed the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, he advised the president, and he promoted public-health policies on TV.
It was President Trump’s choice, in 2020, to keep him in the first job and have him do the other two. He could have fired Fauci from NIAID. He could have ignored his advice. Or, while keeping Fauci as a public official and adviser, Trump could have had him rein in his public commentary (my preference at the time, as I wrote then).
Instead Trump let Fauci continue to act in all three roles while sometimes criticizing him on Twitter and letting aides distribute memos and write op-eds criticizing him. For variety’s sake, Trump sometimes also praised Fauci. In the closing weeks of the 2020 campaign, Trump called Fauci “a disaster” and an “idiot.” The next day he called him “a terrific guy.” On Trump’s last full day in office in 2021, he gave Fauci a presidential commendation.
This was a theme I hit a couple of times in 2020: There was plenty to criticize Fauci over, but Trump was ultimately in charge and should have acted like it. (Bad-faith critics are, naturally, describing me, and NR generally, as having contributed to “hero worship” of Fauci because we made such points.)
Charlie Cooke today makes the case that Fauci is a good example of why presidents should have the power to run their administrations, as the Supreme Court recently recognized in giving them the power to dismiss the heads of agencies wielding executive power. The general point is sound, but it’s worth noting that the NIAID is not an “independent agency,” and Trump had all the power he needed before Slaughter. He just chose to run his administration dysfunctionally.
Update: I have a follow-up.