Legal expert: Robert Mueller's Russia probe may be a bust because he was illegally appointed

Paul Manafort and Richard Gates have pleaded not guilty to all charges in Robert Mueller’s Russia probe, but at least one legal scholar has suggested special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation may not be constitutional.

According to the reasoning, one of the key factors is how Mueller's role is structured. Jeff Sessions recused himself, and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has said Mueller doesn’t report to him with day-to-day decisions.

Because of that, Pepperdine University law professor Douglas W. Kmiec says that Mueller effectively does not have a supervisor — and without one, the Senate would have to confirm Mueller as an executive appointee. Otherwise, his appointment is unconstitutional.

In an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times penned in July, Kmiec suggested that — with Comey’s alleged assumption that President Trump is a wrongdoer— and the special counsel process labelling him as such, that “the investigation itself is arguably equivalent to an unconstitutional indictment.”

The third part of the argument points to the 1999 expiration of a law establishing the independent counsel.

Kmiec suggests the new regulations are unconstitutional.

Looking at the old law, the attorney general would have to conduct an investigation based on “specific and credible” information before an independent counsel was appointed.

"[T]here are no signs that in the wake of Sessions’ recusal, a constitutionally sufficient process triggered the Mueller appointment," he wrote.