Replies

I believe it is the role of the judiciary to judge the constitutionality of legislation, not the President.

Over on This thread Was a discussion of whether or not the AG should enforce unconstituional laws. Post 17 was, imo, excellent.

My input was that even Army privates are expected to know which orders are illegal and are OBLIGATED to disobey those orders. Can we expect less from the President?

>>My input was that even Army privates are expected to know which orders are illegal and are OBLIGATED to disobey those orders. Can we expect less from the President?<<

Common sense would indicate so. :-)

Here's the post you referred to:

"Separation of powers requires that he not enforce laws which he thinks are unconstitutional. The legislature passes laws. If the executives and judiciary enforced and tried ALL of them, all the time, no matter what, then they have no power, it all rests in the legislature. Suppose the legislature passes Jim Crow laws, or the Jews have to get on cattle cars. Only those who can say that "I was was only following orders" is a valid defense can make a case that the police and AG MUST enforce all laws, no matter what.

Once a law is passed, the executive may or may not enforce, the judiciary may or may not try, and the jury may or may not convict, and having convicted, may or may not sentence. Only the jailer has the duty to do what he is ordered to do - that's the separation of powers."

Thank you.