[milwguy]

Here is why the EO is a complete shame...POTUS can’t legally alter where Congress spends the money they appropriate. Line item veto was ruled unconstitutional for just that reason.....here from NRO is more................
The Susan B. Anthony List observation that EOs can be rescinded at the president’s whim is of course true. This particuar EO is also a nullity — presidents cannot enact laws, the Supreme Court has said they cannot impound funds that Congress allocates, and (as a friend points out) the line-item veto has been held unconstitutional, so they can’t use executive orders to strike provisions in a bill. So this anti-abortion EO is blatant chicanery: if the pro-lifers purport to be satisfied by it, they are participating in a transparent fraud and selling out the pro-life cause.

[Dan Nunn]

If you scroll down the NRO's page right now, you'll see the Youtube video of the Democrat admitting just that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIy4-H1RIT8&feature=player_embedded

[Hostage]

Thank you for clarifying the tie-in of the EO to the bill.

So the EO may be viewed as an action similar to line-item veto which is unconstitutional.

But who and how will this invalid action be nullified? Before the Senate? The Supreme Court?