Posted on 02/04/2017 11:36:33 AM PST by Jim W N
From what I can tell, an executive order combines legislative and executive powers in one act and one office, the substance of a dictatorship. The Constitution does not allow the executive branch to make law.
"All legislative Powers granted herein shall be vested in a Congress of the United States..." (Art I, Sec 1 - U.S. Constitution).
From what I can tell, the only valid Trump executive orders may be those repealing Obama's stench of unconstitutional executive orders.
It's not enough to cheer Trump's good intentions in wanting to right decades of wrong-doing by the feds. Constitutionally, HOW is just as, if not more, important than WHAT when it comes to federal action. Other than overturning Obama's surfeit of unconstitutional executive orders, which of Trump's executive orders are not unconstitutional and shouldn't first be passed as law in Congress?
WE THE PEOPLE need to be more than semi-mindless cheerleaders for "our side". We need to be watchdogs verifying the constitutionality of federal acts including those done by those we have elected. "Trust but verify", Ronald Reagan said in reference to treaties which effectively is the same as electing government officials. "Trust but verify" is exactly what we the people should be doing with our elected officials including Trump.
Tyranny on the Right is just as dangerous as tyranny on the Left because "benevolent" tyranny will sooner or later become very malignant, malevolent, and deadly tyranny.
We the people must once again understand that freedom comes from the feds being constrained by the objective Rule of Law (in America that is the Constitution) and tyranny comes from the feds unrestrained and limited only by their own subjective whimsy and morality - the rule of man.
In America, the only legal bulwark of protection of our freedoms against the tyranny of the feds is the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution as written and originally understood and intended. Our job in re-birthing our Free Constitutional Republic beginning here and now, is to reinstate the Constitution front and center as the Supreme Law of the Land against the feds.
We must be as concerned about HOW we get there as we are WHERE we're going. Right or Left, the ends do not justify the means.
The Left has redefined the rules of fair play.
Everything is Unconstitutional if you can find one judge to rule in your favor.
Trump’s Executive Order is pursuant to law. Read it here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states
Obama’s “Executive Action” is unfounded and illicit. Read it here: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2012/06/15/remarks-president-immigration
So where was OUR federal judge ruling against Obama’s EO’s?
Democrats are still running this country.
If our government was functioning correctly then Executive Orders should only be necessary for special circumstances. However our government isn’t operating normally. You have the Senate changing rules to achieve political ends, Democrats refusing to confirm appointments, leaders deliberately slowing down important legislations to forestall passage rather than working together to create legislation.
I’d be far more concerned about our republic than I would be about the Executive Orders. I see what is happening now as perhaps a corrective measure that someday, hopefully, will knock some sense into the heads of politicians.
Precedence has been set - I trust Trump more than anyone since Reagan. If the Dims stop trying to use the courts to nullify his Presidency, the Constitution, and the will of the People, he can settle down to business as it was meant to be - until then, he isn’t stepping on the Constitution or subverting the law.
>
Everything is Unconstitutional if you can find one judge to rule in your favor.
>
EXCEPT for the Judicial...yet /s
I see nothing wrong w/ EO, should they NOT ‘make’, or attempt to alter\disregard existing, law.
They become unconstitutional otherwise. Course, the whole Congress delegating its authority\power is, again, unconstitutional (EG: agencies creating ‘rules’ that have effect of ‘law’). Yet, I have no hope for the courts to find any different.
Our Republic died many moons ago. Its but the illusion otherwise that keeps things as ‘stable’ as they are today.
In short, E.O.s are constitutional because they do not make law but merely implement existing law.
Any manager must give direction to his staff on how he wants any goal handled. That doesn’t mean he’s supplanting the owner.
When his directions create new goals for the firm or undercut old goals, he definitely is violating his job description.
As for the EO temporarily banning immigration from seven terror-supporting countries, this is specifically allowed by statute and issued pursuant thereto in furtherance of duly passed legislation.
The President is the Chief Executive of the Executive Branch. His EOs deal with Executive priorities... which boil down to enforcement of law.
Obama’s EOs attempted to make new law with his pen and phone. He set aside and modified laws passed by Congress and told his agencies to not enforce what he disagreed with. He legislated further than his branch and wasn’t stopped by the other branches.
Trump’s EOs essentially say, “enforce the law.”
Big difference.
So ALL of Trump’s executive orders are pursuant to specific laws passed by Congress?
I hope you’re right but somehow find it hard to believe.
Obama did not what for laws to be enacted. He just went ahead a did whatever he wanted. “If Congress won’t act, I will”
And the idiots bowed down and obeyed.
For the reasons stated, it is precisely why I’m concerned about our republic that I am concerned about the executive orders.
Precedence does not trump the Constitution. Unconstitutional precedence should be stopped in its tracks.
The govt is heading to a state of paralysis. When that happens, we’ll have a dictator that will either abolish or severely curtail their powers.
If the fence surrounding the White House is to be painted, it should not require legislation. Congress simply empowers the President to maintain the official residence and the President takes care of the details. That is what executives do.
The problem comes when a President attempts to expand on what Congress has legislated to create effects on the American people that were never intended. An executive order dictating what bathrooms people should use throughout the nation, for example, is not only none of the President's business, it is none of Congress' business.
What specific order of President Trump do you find objectionable?
As long as the orders are in conjunction ans support existing law, I think they are lawful, even when I disagree.
If the President were constitutionally barred from performing any action, why would he even exist?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.