WASHINGTON — The Justice Department argued Friday that President Donald Trump may remove Maurene Comey, a former federal prosecutor, without cause under the Constitution’s Article II powers. The position came during a hearing before U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman, who is considering Comey’s lawsuit over her abrupt dismissal from the Justice Department last year. Comey, a longtime federal prosecutor in Manhattan and the daughter of former FBI Director James Comey, says she was fired because of her father, her perceived political views or both. Justice Department lawyer Tyler Becker said a recent Supreme Court decision expanding the president’s authority to remove certain agency leaders should also apply to more junior officials. He argued that employees or “inferior officers” who exercise what he called “conclusive and preclusive executive power” must be removable at will. “All of the executive power is vested in a democratically elected president,” Becker told the judge. He said decisions by criminal prosecutors should ultimately be accountable to the president rather than to career officials inside the government. The Supreme Court’s June ruling increased the president’s control over federal agencies but did not definitively resolve whether the president can remove officials classified as inferior officers. The Comey case is testing how far that authority reaches within the Justice Department, including career attorneys who handle criminal prosecutions. Comey was dismissed by letter without an explanation beyond a citation to Article II, which outlines presidential powers. Her lawsuit says the termination violated legal protections for federal employees and was motivated by retaliation and political discrimination. Her attorney, Ellen Blain, challenged the government’s theory as an attempt to justify firing a career civil servant based on family connections. “Article II does not permit anyone to fire a line AUSA without cause,” Blain said, referring to assistant U.S. attorneys. She also argued that no court has held that federal prosecutors exercise the kind of exclusive presidential authority described by the Justice Department. Furman repeatedly pressed Becker on the implications of the government’s position. The judge asked whether Article II would prevent courts from examining a presidential decision to dismiss an employee because of race or gender. “ They could exercise that authority on the basis of race and the court couldn't say otherwise?” Furman asked, according to the exchange in court. “Article II would not permit inquiry into that matter,” Becker replied. The dispute has significance beyond Comey’s employment. A ruling for the Justice Department could strengthen presidential control over career officials who traditionally operate with some independence from political leadership, while a ruling for Comey could reinforce limits on politically motivated dismissals within the federal law-enforcement system. Furman, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, did not issue a ruling Friday.