I have read of federal employees saying that presidents come and go but they, of the bureaucracy, are the ones who remain and really know what is going on. The first part is unquestionably true, and the second is likely true in most cases. I have also read of federal employees instructing their subordinates to slow-walk presidential orders and pretend they were trying to comply while actually delaying implementation until after the next election. I have read repeatedly of president after president complaining that federal employees nominally under their administrations were not carrying out their instructions.
I have read of federal employees proud to be called civil servants, and it is right that civil servants should be proud, for it is an honorable title. The word, “civil,” means “of the citizens,” and a servant is one who serves. A civil servant is one who serves the citizens. These are the same citizens who elected the president and empowered him/her to supervise the civil servants in the executive branch of our government.
The authority and purpose of the president and of all other federal employees combined is limited to implementing the law—nothing more and nothing less. The law is written out in a Constitution ordained and established by the citizens of the United States, along with the statutes subsequently promulgated by the elected representatives of those citizens in accordance with that constitution. Federal civil servants have no other legitimate power or purpose than to obey and implement the law.
Federal law prohibits federal employees from knowingly implementing an illegal order. If a a civil servant recognizes that an order from his/her supervisor is illegal, the civil servant has a duty to tell his/her supervisor that the order is illegal, explain why it is illegal, and openly decline to implement the illegal portion of the order. This is true even if the supervisor is the president or a high-level political appointee. If the order is legal, but the employee believes it is not an appropriate way of implementing the law, the employee can tell the supervisor and ask that the order be rescinded, but has no authority to refuse to implement the order. If a civil servant chooses not to expeditiously implement a legal presidential order, the only honorable course is to resign.
A federal employee who fails to implement the law or exercises powers not delegated to him/her by law is not serving the citizens and disgraces the title of civil servant. Federal employees who resist legal direction from a president elected by the citizens likewise disgrace their titles.
I regularly read of federal employees in the course of their work flagrantly violating laws for which other citizens have been prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned. Many keep their jobs and some are promoted. At worst, these employees are subsequently allowed to retire with their pensions. Prosecutions are almost unheard of. These are people who have sworn to uphold the Constitution, and the only justification for them to even have their jobs is to implement the law; therefore they should be held to a higher legal standard than ordinary citizens and their violations should be prosecuted even more vigorously that those of the common folk.
I know there are a lot of honest, competent civil servants working to implement the law to the best of their ability, and have had the opportunity to interact professionally with many of them. (I have also encountered a few doofuses, but one can find doofuses in every walk of life.) I do not mean to take the entirety of our civil-service corps to task. But allowing even a few rogue federal employees to disobey legitimate orders or fail to uphold the law undermines our system of government. It is essential to the survival of our democratic republic that we diligently identify these rogue tyrants and systematically remove them from positions of authority.