Is An Executive Order a Law that Must be Obeyed?

Political Outcast ^ | January 10, 2013 | Gary DeMar

[LucianOfSamasota]

There’s talk that President Obama will ignore Congress and issue Executive Orders to implement new gun regulations over against the clear reading of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Is an Executive Order a law? Will we be obligated to obey it?

Executive Orders have a long history. Republicans and Democrats have issued them. Only a few of them have been overturned by the courts.

Neither Republicans nor Democrats do much about Executive Orders they don’t like since both parties issue them. This is how the Washington game is played.

Republicans and Democrats like Executive Orders on difficult issues because it stops the legislative process that they’ll have to participate in and eventually vote yes or no. They can always tell the voters back home, “Well, I would have voted against that if the President hadn’t issued an Executive Order. Golly gee willikers, now my hands are tied.” Right.

An Executive Order is only valid if it’s done within the jurisdictional authority of the President’s constitutional authority. To rule against the Second Amendment is not a presidential prerogative. If it is, then the President could turn his attention to the First Amendment and issue an order that newspapers can no longer criticize him. Conservative talk radio would die a quick death if the President issued an Executive Order saying that the freedom of speech had to be limited in several ways, one of which was negative political speech, especially about him.

[LucianOfSamasota]

Don’t get me wrong. I do believe that President Obama would like to do all these things. He’s mad with power. He has a vendetta against America.

Chris Matthews of MSNBC made a statement about how President Obama should have been treated by presidential challenger Mitt Romney in their second debate. It was the fact that Gov. Romney actually challenged the President that led Matthews to go Gestapo on Romney:

“I don’t think [Mitt Romney] understands the Constitution of the United States… He’s the president of the United States. You don’t say, ‘you’ll get your chance.’”

Yes you do. President Obama is an elected official. He’s not a king. The king battle was fought a long time ago at Runnymede in 1215.

If the President and other anti-Second Amendment advocates want to limit our freedoms, then they can go through the amendment process. An Executive Order is the chicken’s way out. It’s also unconstitutional.

The Democrats know this. That’s why they’re sending out Vice President Biden to soften the rhetoric:

“The president is going to act. There are executive orders, there’s executive action that can be taken. We haven’t decided what that is yet. But we’re compiling it all with the help of the attorney general and the rest of the cabinet members as well as legislative action that we believe is required.”

Did you see it? “Legislative action that we believe is required.” In terms of the Separation of Powers, the President does not have the constitutional authority to legislate. Of course, that hasn’t stopped him or any other president.

Biden went on to say that “this is a moral issue and that ‘it’s critically important that we act.’” Morally, the President can’t ignore an Amendment to the Constitution. How is banning guns for everyone the moral thing to do when only a tiny fraction use guns illegally? How will banning guns to stop immoral people from using whatever they can find to do harm?

Timothy McVeigh used kerosene and fertilizer to kill 169 people. Abortion doctors use medical instruments to kill pre-born babies? A man was poisoned with cyanide before he could cash in his $1 million dollar lottery ticket.

[DBrow]

Executive orders impact only the executive branch (well they are supposed to). So The One can order ATF to do lots of antigun things. I think he could order FBI, technically in the judicial branch I think, to set NICS to say NO for every forbidden gun.

Naturally Boehner and the republicans in the House would instantly file impeachment papers, so don’t worry. /s

[grobdriver]

IIRC, Bill Clinton wrote an E.O. proclaiming a rotary-magazine shotgun called a "street-sweeper" to be an NFA weapon.
I do not recall any event where such a weapon had been used in a high-profile crime at the time.

I wouldn't be surprised if Barry tried something similar with a whole list of scary black rifles, declaring them to be NFA weapons that we can all own if we want - once we jump through the NFA hoops.

Whatever they're up to you can be sure it will be an indirect attack while clueless Feinsteins introduce outright banning legislation, knowing it will go down in flames if it ever reaches a vote.

When one hand is waving noisily, it's time to look at what the other hand is doing.

[ldish]

nope not by me as i am going to file to the supremes - first - and then...

[silverleaf]

Newt Gingrich last night on FOX said that obama can issue executive orders ..... but only Congress can authorize funding to carry them out.

Usually no money, means no action can be taken, ie orders to ATF or whoever to register guns, seize them or whatever

So, will our GOP stalwarts in Congress flex their own power, or not?

[Marcella]

“Executive orders impact only the executive branch...”

You are correct. He can issue orders to any of his agencies that deal with firearms to ban certain firearms, ammo, magazines, and register certain weapons,etc.. This will be done for the public safety.

Biden’s committee report comes out next Tuesday and then the president will issue executive orders soon after that, likely within a few days. He will do it.

[muir_redwoods]

I’m sure it would be no problem finding an opinion that says EOs have to be obeyed. I’m equally sure one could find millions of opinions that say “make me”.

Let him issue his damned EO. Let him watch the citizenry ignore him. The thousands and thousands of guns purchased in the last month weren’t bought so someone could have something to turn in.

[apillar]

Is An Executive Order a Law that Must be Obeyed?

Well technically an executive order isn't a law at all, it's an instruction to an federal agency to interpret an existing law a certain way, and well, let's just say the president's own cabinet isn't going to disobey.

President's in the past have tried to stretch this into the realm of making law, the Supreme Court has been pretty firm that this is a no-no:

The Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution.

Obama has been pushing the limits on "Youngstown" since he took office, his "backdoor amnesty" is on shaky legal ground and still being challenged by the courts, but at least he attempted to meet the standards of "Youngstown" by claiming he was clarifying that the head of DHHR had the discretion to delay a deportation order indefinitely.

Most legal experts say that an Assault Weapons Ban or Gun Registration Scheme by executive order would be blatant violation of "Youngstown" and likely to get struck down by the courts. So they predict if Obama does anything with executive order it will be much more limited in scope such as fiddling with the background check system or forcing additional record keeping requirements on gun stores.

[M1903A1]

NICS covers only three categories: handgun, long gun (rifle), shotgun. There’s no distinction if the buyer is purchasing an AR-15 or a Remngton 700.

[Marcella]

“Usually no money, means no action can be taken, ie orders to ATF or whoever to register guns, seize them or whatever”

He won’t need extra money - just use the money his ATF/Homeland Security, FBI, etc., already have. He wants this so much, he would shut down any other programs they had going to get this one done.

[jagusafr]

When one hand is waving noisily, it’s time to look at what the other hand is doing.

Exactly what I’ve been thinking for the last few days: what are they actually doing while Bozo Biden is out saying clearly unconstitutional actions will be taken? To turn a phrase on its head: “Pay no attention to the man in front of the curtain”.

[DBrow]

My point is that NICS can be changed by EO to cover specifics like detachable mags, or semiauto.

I don’t think it can be changed to a registration system (legally), though.

[arthurus]

Whether he can succeed with EOs or not depends entirely on his correct estimation of the actual force that he can bring to bear. It no longer has anything to do with the Constitution.

[abclily]

All of B-HO’s EOs need to be frozen until a judicial committe and an economic committe can look into their impact on the citizenry. Any negative impact should negate the EO.

[Lmo56]

If an EO is in direct violation of the Constitution or a previous SCOTUS ruling - it would be struck down, probably by a 9-0 ruling.

Lets assume that Obama issues an EO banning hi-cap magazines.

SCOTUS has ruled that citizens have the right to possess firearms [District of Columbia v. Heller]. But, it also left open that restrictions on it might be passed by legislative action. However, an EO is an executive action - not a legislative action.

Putting poolitical ideology aside, if SCOTUS were to allow such an EO to stand - it would be ceding all of its legal and moral authority to exist. They might as well pack up their toys and retire, for they would be stating that the Executive Department can supercede the Constitution, the Legislative Department, and the Judicial Department by fiat.

This scenario is a turf war and SCOTUS would assert its authority [probably 9-0] in order to preserve the constitutional concept of the system of Checks and Balances.

[mc5cents]

So, will our GOP stalwarts in Congress

Stalwarts? Stalwarts!? I have flashbacks to Jim Mora: Playoffs? Playoffs!!? LOL You have got to add that sarcasm tag after that kind of comment.

[righttackle44]

Excutive orders are not bulls, nor Scripture, nor edicts, nor binding upon the people. They are directives to the government of the United States to perform certain objectives, instructions, policies, guidelines, wishes, or desires of the president. They are not binding upon the people.

So Obama can order the employees, agents, agencies, departments, and his own staff to carry out his wishes. He could, for example, order the federal government to carry out raids, confiscations, robberies, illegal activities (such as Fast and Furious), the Constitutionality of which could later be argued by the administration in court.

He really does seem to be pushing the people to openly rebel, so he can order his Department Homeland Security, the Internal Revenue Service, and those other federal agencies, to use all of that dum-dum, anti-personnel ammunition he's been buying up.

[mosaicwolf]

The question is do executive orders have to be obeyed? I say no illegal order has to be obeyed. At least by me anyway.

[Rapscallion]

I think he could order FBI, technically in the judicial branch I think,

Not! FBI is a part of the Justice Department. It is in the Executive Branch. Not Judicial or Legislative. The orders to the FBI must be constitutional and legal. As the chief law enforcement officer of the US Government, the president is sworn (hand on bible) to preserve protect and defend the US Constitution and uphold our laws.

[willardwx]

omammy’s order is subject to immediate injunctive orders by a federal court if it even smells legislative. Everyone should calm down. Biden is an idiot and its all a big bluff. He can order agency procedures but he shall not abridge the 2nd amendment in any way what so ever. Jan 19 is national gun day. Everyone demonstrate. I will at my local gun store parking lot(which has sold 1000 firearms since Sandy Hook) and one buyer bough 10,000 rounds of AR 15 ammo!! Good man.