Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is nothing intrinsically unconstitutional about an Executive Order. But if an EO is used for the wrong thing, then it CAN be unconstitutional.... as many of Obama's are.
Executive Orders are what a President is supposed to use to carry out something passed by Congress (and signed into law by the Prez, of course).
Classic example is, Congress passes something saying that a group of Federal buildings on a corner in DC will be painted brown. Obama signs it into law. Obama then issues an Exec Order to solicit three companies for bids on the painting work, issues another order to check the bidding companies' qualifications etc. Obama is issuing Exec Orders pursuant to something Congress passed into law.
If he's issuing Exec Orders to delay implementation of part of Obamacare for a year, that's the equivalent of issuing an EO to paint the buildings red instead of brown. It does NOT carry out what Congress passed. In fact, it's the act of a dictator with no Congressional oversight or adherence to procedures required by the Constitution, at all.
Executive Orders can only be used to do something already authorized by Congress.
Obama's recent statement that he will "do something about" illegal imigration "without Congress" is similar to a bank robber's saying he will take money out of the bank without the bank officials' permission.
There is nothing intrinsically unconstitutional about an Executive Order. But if an EO is used for the wrong thing, then it CAN be unconstitutional.... as many of Obama's are.
Executive Orders are what a President is supposed to use to carry out something passed by Congress (and signed into law by the Prez, of course).
President Theodore Roosevelt enacted 1,081 executive orders during his presidency. President Dwight Eisenhower had 484. President Ronald Reagan had 381. And President George W. Bush had 291.
President Barack Obama has enacted 182 executive orders -- yet the GOP accuses him of being an "imperial president," and Republican members of the House of Representatives are preparing to sue him for violating the Constitution.
Obama uses "Executive Orders" to do things not explicitly allowed under the Constitution. Most Presidents used them to clarify or as addendum to existing laws. But he uses them as "New Laws" circumventing Congress, who has the only Constitutional power to create/pass laws. Yes, he is scary!!! (and he claims to be a "Constitutional Lawyer"!!!)
It matters not the NUMBER of Executive Orders. No one I know cares how many he enacts. What people care about are the content, the intent, the political motivations, and the Constitutionality.
Honestly didn't think this needed to be explained.
Well since the supreme court has in the past found that there is reasonable discretion in enforcing passed laws.....yes I would suggest more then the one you have, since it is arguably quite legal. Despite the screaming from the right wing.
It matters not the NUMBER of Executive Orders. No one I know cares how many he enacts. What people care about are the content, the intent, the political motivations, and the Constitutionality.
Honestly didn't think this needed to be explained.
And we have the courts to decide constitutionality. Its never been up to the people to decide that. No where in the constitution does it say "The people of this country should interpret the constitution" Thats what the Judicial branch does, day in, day out.
And we have the courts to decide constitutionality. Its never been up to the people to decide that. No where in the constitution does it say "The people of this country should interpret the constitution" Thats what the Judicial branch does, day in, day out.
Oh, cool!
So that means that, any time I want, I can kidnap a black guy off the street, put chains on him, and force him to work on my farm 24/7/365, for poor accomodations and worse food, and whip him if he doesn't do everything I want?
According to you, it isn't unconstitutional, until the Courts rule on that particular case a few years from now. Because (again according to you) I have no standing to read the 13th amendment and decide for myself that was I had done was unconstitutional.
That's how it works, eh?
(I believe that takes care of one of the sillier "arguments" offered by our brothers of the southpaw persuasion.)
So that means that, any time I want, I can kidnap a black guy off the street, put chains on him, and force him to work on my farm 24/7/365, for poor accomodations and worse food, and whip him if he doesn't do everything I want?
According to you, it isn't unconstitutional, until the Courts rule on that particular case a few years from now. Because (again according to you) I have no standing to read the 13th amendment and decide that was I had done was unconstitutional.
That's how it works, eh?
Actually the courts did rule on slavery, and agreed that ending it was constitutional. Or don't you know supreme court law?
Its also plenty constitutional if the courts decide they don't want to hear it. They are saying, when they deny a case, that you haven't made a constitutional argument against the law you are going to court against.
It matters not the NUMBER of Executive Orders. No one I know cares how many he enacts. What people care about are the content, the intent, the political motivations, and the Constitutionality.
Honestly didn't think this needed to be explained.
What most people here care about is that he's got a (D) after his name. Bush did plenty of things by Executive Order after 9/11. There wasn't a whole lot of conservative chatter about it then.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
