Presidential executive orders..

[Steve]

Presidential executive orders..

As early as 1792, according to Thomas Jefferson: "I said to [President Washington] that if the equilibrium of the three great bodies, Legislative, Executive and Judiciary, could be preserved, if the Legislature could be kept independent, I should never fear the result of such a government; but that I could not but be uneasy when I saw that the Executive had swallowed up the Legislative branch."

The Constitution anticipated that the Congress and the Court would jealously guard their prerogatives, and, setting power against power, unconstitutional excursions by the executive would be met with fierce resistance. Sadly, neither the Congress nor the Court have acted boldly in defense of the Constitution, particularly in the recent past.

The simple truth is that the courts cannot be counted upon to check Presidential power — our research has been able to identify only two cases in the history of the country in which the courts have struck down completely an executive order. The first of these was in 1952, when the U.S. Supreme Court negated the seizure of the steel mills ordered by President Truman,

Notwithstanding this U.S. Supreme Court decision, presidents of both parties continued to implement controversial initiatives using presidential directives — often in the face of Congressional opposition. The other time the court struck down completely an executive order was President Clinton's executive order relating to the hiring of permanent striker replacements by federal contractors,

Congress has done little more than the courts in restricting presidential lawmaking. Nevertheless, Congress did make one bold step to check executive powers in the related arenas of executive orders, states of emergency and emergency powers.

Unfortunately, these 1970s efforts to impose restraints on unconstitutional exercises of power by presidents have been ineffective —

http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-wo102799.html

http://www.thisnation.com/question/040.html

sadly We the people haven't said much either..

the solution to a fine line between leading and decreeing has long been passed... but could be solved with a simple law... that "All executive orders must go for a vote" and if failed to pass they shall be immediately struck down"..

the problem with our lawmakers is that few want to take the responsibility that goes with the power to legislate.. so the delegate their authority and responsibility to the president.. giving US laws we didn't want..

such as Anwar drilling bans..

 

[Lonecowboy]

the problem with our lawmakers is that few want to take the responsibility that goes with the power to legislate.. so the delegate their authority and responsibility to the president.. giving US laws we didn't want..

Kind of like Mitch McConnel is trying to do right now with the debt celing!

Executive orders are just what they sound like, a directive from the head of the executive branch to his subordinates.
Such as "all government employees take Monday off!"
or to the DEA- " do not enforce marijuana laws"

They should not have force of law period. Or any bering whatsoever upon non government employees.

 

[Steve]

Kind of like Mitch McConnel is trying to do right now with the debt ceiling!

that is a great example...