When can President use EO as opposed to needing Congressional action?

[Lisa558]

The courts would probably overturn that; however, the courts should have overturned Obama's DACA but didn't, so what do I know?

That was the example I was about to bring up. Obama himself admitted he was violating the Constitution but went ahead anyway, counting on the SCOTUS to let him get away with it.

On an aside, have you heard some of these entitled, arrogant DACA young adults? They were screaming the F word at Pelosi, demanding they be made citizens. They should thank their lucky stars they’re not being returned to San Salvadore or wherever.

 

[easyt65]

The courts would probably overturn that; however, the courts should have overturned Obama's DACA but didn't, so what do I know?

The Court failed to do its job with DACA, which was to rule on the Constitutionality of DACA.

It was completely Un-Constitutional.

Instead they ruled on the pain / suffering for illegals who had been here on DACA were it to be overturned.

 

[easyt65]

Obama himself admitted he was violating the Constitution

'Nuff said

 

[Harpy Eagle]

OK. Let‘s take immigration reform as an example. The Congress hasn’t passed any legislation, and it’s not even on its radar. Could a president issue an EO for the following:

Biden: All illegal aliens residing here are now citizens, and can vote in the upcoming election, are eligible for full welfare benefits.

What happens in that case?

It would be ignored as that is not in the power of the EO. That would be breaking existing law.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Why would I complain when Trump helped ensure our country’s energy independence and keep gas affordable for the middle and lower classes?

So, you do not care about one man having too much power as you pretended in your OP.

Thanks, that was fun.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

When gas was 2 bucks?...............Please. How many men lost their good paying jobs with a pen. Guess you'd have to be one of them to know

True, I have not lost a job with a pen.

But I have lost a pen on the job.

 

[easyt65]

It would be ignored as that is not in the power of the EO. That would be breaking existing law.

And yet it has been done...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And yet it has been done...

If the courts allow it then there is little that can be done. Tis the nature of our system of Govt.

 

[22lcidw]

Are there no laws governing this? What if the president issued an EO that all government jobs for the next three months would go only to POC? Or what if he said that all businesses must pay $15 an hour or they would be shut down?

Does he just do what he wants, and any objections go through a lengthy court fight? I say we need guidelines right from the start.

The courts messed with some of Trump's EO's. We need the same from them for Biden.

 

[Delldude]

Are there no laws governing this? What if the president issued an EO that all government jobs for the next three months would go only to POC? Or what if he said that all businesses must pay $15 an hour or they would be shut down?

Does he just do what he wants, and any objections go through a lengthy court fight? I say we need guidelines right from the start.

The Constitution is the law. Obama got his butt kicked there on most of his EO's.

 

[Delldude]

Yes, that’s true. That is why our brilliant founders set up a judicial branch to control a future president with runaway dictatorial behavior.

And why the left wants to control it.

 

[rightwinger]

The Constitution is the law. Obama got his butt kicked there on most of his EO's.

Actually most stood…even DACA

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The courts messed with some of Trump's EO's. We need the same from them for Biden.

and they have done so...for example his vaccine mandate EO

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And why the left wants to control it.

Both sides want to control it.

 

[Delldude]

and they have done so...for example his vaccine mandate EO

For who?

 

[woodwork201]

We all remember how snarky Obama was when he threatened that if Congress didn’t yield to his wishes, he “had a pen and a phone.” But exactly how much power does our Constitution, brilliantly devised to PREVENT a dictator, allow a president to sidestep Congress with an EO?

For example, on Day 1, Biden killed the Keystone Pipeline (payback to the environmental groups), which, along with his other war on energy efforts, has moved us from energy independence to paying $5 bucks a gallon, and begging Arabs for oil. Should this much power to do damage reside in ONE person?

The Constitution and laws give the President or the Executive Branch certain power and authority over the Executive Branch just like the boss or CEO of any company. An executive order is nothing more than the memo your employer's CEO might send. It is the President's instruction to his staff on how to execute on the authority that the President has over the Executive Branch. Executive Orders cannot be used for any other purpose or to enact law or to do anything that the Constitution or Congress did not already allow the President to do.

 

[Delldude]

The Constitution and laws give the President or the Executive Branch certain power and authority over the Executive Branch just like the boss or CEO of any company. An executive order is nothing more than the memo your employer's CEO might send. It is the President's instruction to his staff on how to execute on the authority that the President has over the Executive Branch. Executive Orders cannot be used for any other purpose or to enact law or to do anything that the Constitution or Congress did not already allow the President to do.

For the most part, his EO's only apply to that which is the fed.

 

[Independent thinker]

We all remember how snarky Obama was when he threatened that if Congress didn’t yield to his wishes, he “had a pen and a phone.” But exactly how much power does our Constitution, brilliantly devised to PREVENT a dictator, allow a president to sidestep Congress with an EO?

For example, on Day 1, Biden killed the Keystone Pipeline (payback to the environmental groups), which, along with his other war on energy efforts, has moved us from energy independence to paying $5 bucks a gallon, and begging Arabs for oil. Should this much power to do damage reside in ONE person?

It's getting to the point now where presidents issue decrees and let the courts decide if they are valid or not.

 

[task0778]

A couple of salient points here (I think):

Presidents cannot create new laws or change existing ones, at least they are not supposed to. BUT - if the courts allow them to get away with it, then it can happen and that has probably occurred far too often in the past. Any presidential action or order is supposed to be based on existing law; everyone of them starts out with the statement for where the president's authority to do this or that is grounded in legislation somewhere, or even the Constitution itself. And usually that's where a president can be restrained, IF the Courts do their jobs correctly. I suspect the current SC will do just that, and contrary to the opinions of some they won't be partisan about it. IMHO, past presidents have gotten away with a lotta crap that should have been struck down but wasn't. I do not believe that future presidents in either party will enjoy that same treatment.

 

[bendog]

We all remember how snarky Obama was when he threatened that if Congress didn’t yield to his wishes, he “had a pen and a phone.” But exactly how much power does our Constitution, brilliantly devised to PREVENT a dictator, allow a president to sidestep Congress with an EO?

For example, on Day 1, Biden killed the Keystone Pipeline (payback to the environmental groups), which, along with his other war on energy efforts, has moved us from energy independence to paying $5 bucks a gallon, and begging Arabs for oil. Should this much power to do damage reside in ONE person?

You're complaining democrats ... after Iraq?