Posted on 02/04/2017 11:36:33 AM PST by Jim W N
From what I can tell, an executive order combines legislative and executive powers in one act and one office, the substance of a dictatorship. The Constitution does not allow the executive branch to make law.
"All legislative Powers granted herein shall be vested in a Congress of the United States..." (Art I, Sec 1 - U.S. Constitution).
From what I can tell, the only valid Trump executive orders may be those repealing Obama's stench of unconstitutional executive orders.
It's not enough to cheer Trump's good intentions in wanting to right decades of wrong-doing by the feds. Constitutionally, HOW is just as, if not more, important than WHAT when it comes to federal action. Other than overturning Obama's surfeit of unconstitutional executive orders, which of Trump's executive orders are not unconstitutional and shouldn't first be passed as law in Congress?
WE THE PEOPLE need to be more than semi-mindless cheerleaders for "our side". We need to be watchdogs verifying the constitutionality of federal acts including those done by those we have elected. "Trust but verify", Ronald Reagan said in reference to treaties which effectively is the same as electing government officials. "Trust but verify" is exactly what we the people should be doing with our elected officials including Trump.
Tyranny on the Right is just as dangerous as tyranny on the Left because "benevolent" tyranny will sooner or later become very malignant, malevolent, and deadly tyranny.
We the people must once again understand that freedom comes from the feds being constrained by the objective Rule of Law (in America that is the Constitution) and tyranny comes from the feds unrestrained and limited only by their own subjective whimsy and morality - the rule of man.
In America, the only legal bulwark of protection of our freedoms against the tyranny of the feds is the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution as written and originally understood and intended. Our job in re-birthing our Free Constitutional Republic beginning here and now, is to reinstate the Constitution front and center as the Supreme Law of the Land against the feds.
A big difference when an EO is issued to carry out current law unlike what Obama did with EOs. Wise up. Are you at all concerned with the Alphabet orgs that issue regulations that have exactly the effect of law with out any discussion by Congress?
In my humble opinion everybody needs to cut President Trump some slack.
There are three branches of the federal government and the judicial branch can shut down the president’s policy initiatives plus filibusters in the Senate can stall them.
There are 857 federal district court and federal appellate court positions.
President Clinton got 373 judges confirmed and President Obama got 323 Article III judges confirmed. That leaves 155 federal judges from other presidents. I’m sure a few of the Clinton judges have now retired or are on Senior (part time) status, but you get the picture.
Executive Order: Definition from Black's Law Dictionary: Directive action from a prime minister or president to its executive governmental agencies in an official document.
The uneducated telling others to get an education. Makes you look bad, dork.
Posting the EOs by number is silly, it depends entirely on what the EO accomplishes. An EO can be issued to name a post office or abolish a thousand EOs, but it would only be one.
Ok lets go emanations of penumbra hunting.
Jim, I'm not objecting to you questioning President Trump's executive orders, but I'm certainly not cheering you, either.
You've demonstrated on this thread that you're woefully underinformed about the legality and constitutionality of the President's recent EOs, so I really can't have a conversation with you, regarding them.
Have a good evening.
You do realize that Cruz lost don't you?
No how about the Constitution as written as originally understood and intended.
Go to your Leftist friends for your penumbras.
Cruz lost and I’m glad. Let’s hope the Constitution didn’t lose. I don’t think it did and I think Trump wants what’s best for America, but we the people should as Reagan said, trust but verify. Trump is in there for eight years. You and I are here for the rest of our lives and shouldn’t give Carte Blanche to any federal official.
You’ve been talking past me the whole time here.
I didn’t say Trump’s EO’s are necessarily unconstitutional. My point that you so blithely miss is their constitutionality should be scrutinized because generally EO’s have the force of law which is either unconstitutional or on the ragged edge. I also said that overturning Obama’s EO’s is needed and probably valid.
Bye.
Seriously, grow a pair. In case you haven't noticed, libs will attack any policy or person who disagrees with them.
Several people have deigned to politely show the ignorance of this post.
You should thank them for their kindness.
The “ignorance of this post” is to have a discussion about the constitutionality of federal acts regardless whether the actual acts turn out to be constitutional.
The #1 political issue in our country is the Constitution.
The discussion about the Constitutionality of ANY major federal action needs to happen and did happen. More is needed going forward.
To that extent, thanks for participating regardless of your flame-throwing.
I feel you Jim. But I am not as concerned with how we get there and think the ends do usually justify the means, especially when we’re talking about protecting the country from third world trash that half of the Republicans in Congress would welcome with open arms.
Nice of you to finally make your point, but as I've suspected all along, you're woefully uninformed about the constitutionality and legality of the President's executive orders.
If you'd bothered to read any of the dozens of threads just recently posted on this topic, you would have seen the precise legal statutes and sections of the Constitution that specifically relate to the immigration DOs, multiple times.
Hell, quite a few Freepers have the relevant statutes and clauses from the Constitution committed to memory - that's how often this subject has been discussed here, over the last twenty years.
Do yourself a favor, and quit displaying your ignorance about something that most in this community are well acquainted with.
The president is sworn to faithfully “execute” the laws of the United States. As such he is required to issue “executive orders” in order to faithfully execute the laws.
The executive orders that Trump has issued are designed to enforce existing laws and not to create new ones.
Obama’s orders tended to ignore existing laws and to create new ones.
Trump is simply trying to undo all the illegal executive orders of Obama and to enforce the laws that he ignored.
Nope, I’ll keep emphasizing the primary importance of the Constitution when it comes to federal acts. If you don’t like it tough. That’s what I do and will continue to do because it needs to be done. IMO, when it comes to discussing or evaluating acts of the feds including Trump’s acts, the Constitution if mentioned at all, takes a back seat. I’ll try to do my part to change that whether you like it or not.
What you miss is the importance of the discussion itself which itself puts the Constitution where it belongs - front and center when it comes to federal acts. Ignoring the centrality of the Constitution relative to federal acts is THE reason we’re in this mess.
The discussion itself is the reason I posted this. The finer points being debated is fine. The point is get the Constitution front and center. Again, our goal should be the rebirth of our Free Constitutional Republic.
To that end, thanks for participating.
No “Executive Order” is a legal term of art that is executive act that combines making a law or regulation and enforcing it.
“Executive Order: Definition from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary: A declaration by the president or a governor which has the force of law, usually based on existing statutory powers, and requiring no action by the Congress or state legislature.” https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/executive_order
Just like the laws that of the land, some are of great importance and some are trivial. They have been numbered since 1907.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.