“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.
Are there laws that specifically require that the President approve those things you mentioned - the size of the military and the pay?
How would we find out whether a law has to be presented to a valid Constitutional president before they can become law?