I must have responded to somebody else, then, when I said I had asked my senator about it and he said I should pay my taxes.
And then I mentioned that David, here at FR, had noted that laws don’t have to be signed by the POTUS to take effect. As long as a bill was not vetoed by a valid POTUS, they would take effect regardless of the POTUS.
So the authority to tax me belongs to Congress with or without a valid President’s signature.
Incidentally, that is different than the situation with Lakin, though, because combat orders HAVE to be approved by “the President” and CANNOT be contrary to the Constitution. So there has to be a Constitutionally-valid approval by the POTUS before the SecDef can implement a plan regarding the use of force.
That’s why Lind’s argument falls apart when you look at the actual legally-binding documents.
And that’s also why Lakin’s orders are different from orders to clean latrines. You don’t have to have Presidential authorization to do the normal duties that are governed by regulations. That’s why Lakin could in good conscience obey the orders he received up until the combat orders came along. The other orders can be legally valid based on the structure of the military and the authorizations in the regulations, etc.
That could be why Lakin was able to say that the orders he pleaded guilty to were lawful orders. But combat is a different thing. The 4 legal sources I’ve mentioned ALL agree that Constitutional and lawful authorization from a (Constitutional, lawful) POTUS is critical to the lawfulness of combat orders.
Notice that the order directly related to his deployment order is the one Lakin did NOT plead guilty to, and it is the one which REQUIRES valid Presidential authorization in order to be lawful, according to all 4 legal sources I’ve cited.
Thanks for the answer.
“And then I mentioned that David, here at FR, had noted that laws don’t have to be signed by the POTUS to take effect. As long as a bill was not vetoed by a valid POTUS, they would take effect regardless of the POTUS.”
I think the laws have to be presented to the President. He can permit them to become law by not vetoing them, but they cannot become law without being given to the President for action.
Thus, every law passed since 20 Jan 2009 is invalid IF, as you say, Obama is not able to give valid orders or take valid actions. So you have an obligation to disobey those laws, IF you believe Lakin was right to disobey.
But of course, no one is doing this because there is no advantage to anyone to do so - just as there was nothing achieved by Lakin.
You cannot pick and choose. You cannot say some orders are valid because they don’t require the President, and others are not because they do. The decision on how many men to have in the military runs through the President. Military pay runs through the President. So no one has a valid reason to be in the military or paid without the President’s approval.