Next stop, Leavenworth Penitentiary.
Attorney General Eric Holder couldn't explain to a Congressional Committee the constitutional basis for executive orders such as President Obama's delay of the employer mandate because he hasn't read the legal analysis -- or at least, hasn't seen it in a long time.
"I'll be honest with you, I have not seen -- I don't remember looking at or having seen the analysis in some time, so I'm not sure where along the spectrum that would come," Holder replied to Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, when Lee asked him to explain the nature of Obama's constitutional power to delay the mandate.
Sen Lee had based his question on a standard legal test, first described by US Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, who said the president's authority to issue executive orders is strongest when he does so with the backing of Congress (category one), more dubious when he issues an order pertaining to a topic on which Congress has not passed a law (category two), and weakest when the executive order is "incompatible with a congressional command" (category three), to use Lee's paraphrase.....more at washingtonexaminer.com ...