by Jack Lee
Whether you agree with the President or not, he does have the power to issue Executive Orders that carry into law, so long as they do not violate the Constitution.
President Obama has issued 128 Executive Orders as of June 14th, 2012. Franklin D. Roosevelt issued 3,522 executive orders!
We don’t like the President (Executive branch) to use this power too frequently or too casually, because it does do an end run around the checks and balances found in the Legislative Branch.
However, there are times when Congress may be in a partisan gridlock and the President must make an important decision. We elected him to lead and this is indeed leadership, even though it is fraught with risks. Consider, if his decision is rescinded by Congress or the Supreme Court, his judgement is called into question and he may be damaged forever. Executive orders must therefor be carefully thought out and used only when absolutely necessary in compelling circumstances for the good of the nation, and not for partisan good or for re-election.
The first Presidential order was given by George Washington in 1789.
Citizens who disagree with a Presidential Order have a mandate to speak out in protest, however they should make their argument on firm ground with the understanding of what the Constitution allows the President.
One of the best historical articles I’ve ever read on Presidential Orders can be found by clicking here.
Only two Executive Orders have ever been overturned because it requires a super majority vote by Congress.
Now this quick summary detailing the President’s authority to issue an Executive Order:
“A presidential executive order (EO) is a directive issued to federal agencies, department heads, or other federal employees by the President of the United States under his statutory or constitutional powers.
In many ways, presidential executive orders are similar to written orders, or instructions issued by the president of a corporation to its department heads or directors.
Thirty days after being published in the Federal Register, executive orders become law. While they do bypass the U.S. Congress and the standard legislative law making process, no part of an executive order may direct the agencies to conduct illegal or unconstitutional activities.
President George Washington issued the first executive order in 1789. Since then, all U.S. presidents have issued executive orders, ranging from Presidents Adams, Madison and Monroe, who issued only one each, to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who issued 3,522 executive orders.
Reasons for Issuing Executive Orders
Presidents typically issue executive orders for one of these purposes:
1. Operational management of the executive branch
2. Operational management of federal agencies or officials
3. To carry out statutory or constitutional presidential responsibilities”
This is a great test. See if you can pass it.
Below is a link to a 30-question test to see how well you know US Law.
Not exactly grade-school level.
Give it a shot, and see how well you do!
Supposedly 96% of all High School Seniors FAILED this test .. AND if that’s not bad enough, 50+% of all individuals over 50 did too!!
Take the test and be surprised at what we don’t know !
http://games.toast.net/independence/
I passed, but I have to confess I missed 5 that I consider curve ball questions.
100%!
I tell ya Jack, it’s a shame what this country has become.
Heck, leadership wise we now take a back seat to the Rooskies…
Don’t believe it?
Just check out this for the bitter truth…
http://www.tomatobubble.com/putin_obama.html
lol now that was an interesting link Joseph! But, seriously, I’m glad you folks like this article. Its important to understand what’s going on in the White House and to understand our Constitution
Confession time too. I passed it, but I had to take it twice. Those last ones got me.;>)
Hey, before I forget happy Father’s Day to all you dads. Hope you all have great days!
There is absolutely no constitutional provision for the President to have and use Executive Orders. We are not at war and the President cannot use his executive order to go against the constitution or the law of the land. By choosing to use Executive orders for reasons such as deciding not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act – which is a law passed by Congress and the order to ignore immigration law for certain younger illegal immigrants – also a law passed by Congress, it seems to me that the President has used these orders in an illegal way which should make those orders null and void. Congress needs to address this now.
Basis in US Constitution – US presidents have issued executive orders since 1789. Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of “executive power” given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 4.
Most Executive Orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President’s sworn duties, the intent being to help direct officers of the US Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office.
As I see it EO is necessary to insure our laws are upheld and used when clarification is needed to comply with existing laws.
Our do nothing Senate in 2010 failed to pass the Dream Act. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on May 11, 2011, according to Wikipedia, indicated that he would consider adding a workplace enforcement measure in the DREAM Act that would require every employer to use E-Verify, the government’s Internet-based work eligibility verification system.[36] President Obama supported the bill as one of his efforts to reform the US immigration system.[37]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DREAM_Act
We are still waiting for Mr. Reid. If he had done his job over a year ago (5/2011) the Dream Act could be our current law. Therefore, the existing law is the one that existed prior to 12/2010.
I dont believe BO has the authority to circumvent this law with an EO, because our Congress voted it down a year and a half ago. (12/2010) This is not an ancient law needing minor clarification for operational purposes. He took an oath, just like all govt employees, to uphold our EXISTING laws. He doesnt get to select which laws hell uphold and which ones he wont enforce. If thats the way he wants to run this country then we dont need our Congress.
Just remember the next time he blames, The Do Nothing Congress hes actually talking about the Do Nothing Senate controlled by Democrat Harry Reid.
We need an all/almost new Congress filled with members who will do the job of running this country instead of making sure they have a job for the rest of their life.
My score mirrored yours Jack. I answered the important ones correctly and at first I thought it was too easy.
Webpages where you can see a few of our former President’s EO’s:
GWB:
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/orders/
Clinton:
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/clinton-subjects.html
George Bush:
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/wbush-subjects.html
Most people don’t question his ability to issue Executive Orders but whether this order is legal and proper on merit
If I’m not mistaken the Congress has thirty days in which they can strike down these orders. EO’s seem to be ignored. I don’t recall controversy about the implementation of these orders just on occasion at the announcement.
Thanks to the statute of limitations, I can now admit to violating a Presidential Order… once.
It was a blatantly stupid order that violated our Constitutional rights and it was later rescinded, but only after a class action lawsuit was filed.
I had no moral compunctions about doing an end run around the EO in order to protect my otherwise perfectly legal purchase. The EO came right after I had paid for my property and I was about to load it on a truck to bring it home, so I thought, well, I could leave it and incur a huge storage bill or go ahead and ship it. I shipped it and trusted to dumb luck it would not be intercepted. Luck was on my side – and eventually so was the law, but had I complied I could have easily lost thousands of dollars with zero chance of recovery. Many persons did too!
What was it? Oh, it was just an old ordinary tank, nothing special about it.
Okay Jack, you can’t tell us your story without telling us what you did with the “ordinary” tank (like everyone has one tucked away in the backyard). Do you still have it?
If you do still have it, will you take me for a ride in it?
Great article, Jack. And I too am interested in this tank situation. (What? Just because I’m a lib doesn’t mean I don’t think tanks are cool!) Which president gave this order?
Michelle: “By choosing to use Executive orders for reasons such as deciding not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act – which is a law passed by Congress”
I may be mistaken but I don’t think an executive order was used or required for this decision. It doesn’t change the law or the enforcement of a law. He will still enforce DOMA (which is really easy to do, it just means not giving federal marriage benefits to same-sex married couples), he just won’t be defending it in court. Lots of presidents have chosen not to defend laws in court that they think are unconstitutional.
It was in Clinton’s first term and it was an old British tank from the 50’s that had been demilled according to BATF standards, but for a time there was a freeze on importing almost anything that was a military vehicle.