Posted on 01/18/2009 9:02:39 AM PST by Polarik
Executive Orders (EOs) are legally binding orders given by the President, acting as the head of the Executive Branch, to Federal Administrative Agencies. Executive Orders are generally used to direct federal agencies and officials in their execution of congressionally established laws or policies. However, in many instances they have been used to guide agencies in directions contrary to congressional intent.
Not all EOs are created equal...[a] subset of Executive Orders are those concerned with national security or defense issues. These have generally been known as National Security Directives. Under the Clinton Administration, they have been termed "Presidential Decision Directives."
Executive Orders do not require Congressional approval to take effect but they have the same legal weight as laws passed by Congress. The President's source of authority to issue Executive Orders can be found in the Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution which grants to the President the "executive Power." Section 3 of Article II further directs the President to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." To implement or execute the laws of the land, Presidents give direction and guidance to Executive Branch agencies and departments, often in the form of Executive Orders.
Controversy
Executive Orders are controversial because they allow the President to make major decisions, even law, without the consent of Congress. This, of course, runs against the general logic of the Constitution -- that no one should have power to act unilaterally. Nevertheless, Congress often gives the President considerable leeway in implementing and administering federal law and programs. Sometimes, Congress cannot agree exactly how to implement a law or program. In effect, this leaves the decision to the federal agencies involved and the President that stands at their head.
(Excerpt) Read more at thisnation.com ...
We’d better get used to being “Occupied”. And resist.
Whatever George I-V tells him to do.
“Presidential Executive Orders: How would Obama use them?”
Given that he has no respect for the law or the Constitution he will issue orders that are patently illegal and expect them to be obeyed. Count on it.
Presidential Executive Orders; How would 0bama use them?
Ping.
(New tagline.)
Spot on.
That seems to be the reason (well, one of the reasons) the left liberal sheep think he's the worst president ever.
Once upon a time I had a link to where one can look up and see how many executive orders a president had signed. I can't remember where it is now.
Well, I should have kept reading. Thanks for the info.
I’m trying to remember the line that Yul Brynner used when he was Pharoah in The 10 Commandments. “So it is written, so it is done”? Something like that.
BOOKMARKED , THANKS FOR THE LINK
I heard an interview this morning in which he was asked if he would issue an executive order overturning one of President Bush's executive orders -- I think the one on stem cell research.
His answer, as best I recall, was that the issue needed to be addressed by Congress, because the peoples' representatives should be making such a decision, not just one man.
I (along with other conservatives) didn't like President Clinton issuing executive orders, and therefore I didn't like President Bush doing it either. If it's wrong for one party, it's wrong for the other.
Whether he'll live up to it or not remains to be seen, but I liked President-elect Obama's answer.
At the stroke of a . . . open homosexuality in our armed forces is a near certainty.
mmmmmmmmm...;0)
My guess is that most every executive order GW made Zero will try and countermand.
He will use them at will to get what he wants without any input from the public. He will not be afraid to use them.
If Bush had any balls or real concern for the country he would have used EOs to open oil drilling at ANWR, reopen drilling everywhere, order immediate secret military tribunals for the gitmo bunch, ordered immediate execution for all of the gitmo residents found guilty and quite a few other things that would have benefited the country.
All missed opportunities for which I hold him in contempt.
Thanks, LucyT
Wonderful article by Polarik!
Ping.
Here's an example: Biden's public comment that 'Barack Obama isn't gonna take your shotguns away' can be understood to mean the Obama administration is going to go headlong after the arms held by citizens, to 'get evil guns out of circulation'.
Ban Guns. Or at least ban the import of guns, gun parts and ammunition. He can do that by directing the Attorney General to find them not particularly suitable for sporting purposes.
He can step up the BATFE's harassment of gun owners and dealers. Of course it won't be written quite that way, but that will be the effect.
If, as I expect the new and improved assault weapon's ban passes, the BATFE will have lots of extra "grounds" for such harassment.
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.