Trapshooters Forum banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,913 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm trying to figure out what are the Constitutional checks on rule by executive orders. I can't come up with anything specific. Obama was a constitutional scholar and I am afraid he decided there aren't any, and consequently can get away with it.

I hope I can get some specific answers and this thread does just turn into another bash Obama exercise. He may deserve bashing, but that doesn't answer my question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,406 Posts
If the power is from the people, how do the people revoke his power of executive order especially if he is exceeding his authority?
Petition, perhaps?

Please don't say impeachment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,832 Posts
Congress controls the purse string (supposedly).

WILL THEY HAVE THE BALZ TO EXERT THEIR POWER IF THEY THINK OBAMA EXCEEDS HIS AUTHORITY?

I doubt it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,277 Posts
Count Boehner out. He keeps caving in to Obama.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,797 Posts
If Obama is/was a constitutional scholar, then I'm a brain surgeon. I think he figured out enough to get around it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,913 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
CharlieAMA - Unfortunately you are probably correct.

RWT - Yes Congress controls the purse, but most agencies are funded in a way that allows a lot of discretion over the specifics of how to spend their money. And the prez is saying 'This is how I will spend it'.

I can't think of a Supreme Court decision checking an executive order other than their decision that Andrew Jackson couldn't kick the Native Americans out of their homes in the south. Andrew Jackson ignored the Supreme Court, and got away with it. Obama probably learned that lesson.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,797 Posts
Sam- Sorry for the snide remark. In all seriousness, I don't know of a Constitutional check on executive orders. I don't know if there is a Congressional law that can over ride it. I don't know if the Supreme Court can over rule an executive order. I can see a need for executive orders from time to time, but to run/rule the country by them to me is tyrannical, dictatorial, and probably unconstitutional. IMHO. Charlie
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,797 Posts
Another point- Our founding father gave us 3 branches of government in which to guide this great nation of ours. So far, until 5 years ago, it has worked pretty well. Now, according to Obama, he only needs one branch of government. Our founding fathers are probably turning over in their graves. For someone to flush 232 years of government down the drain, and declare himself absolute ruler by decree is unfathomable. Charlie
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,913 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
CharlieAMA - Correct, but it seems the Founders did not anticipate rule by executive order and consequently did not add a specific check to that action. At least I can't find that check.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,797 Posts
The other problem here, in my opinion, is that he is not a LEADER. He hides behind his assumed powers. He cannot stand up like a man, nor take it like a man. He does not accept blame or responsibility. He is a feckless president. His powers are enormous. He does not understand them, therefore he abuses them. He is on a power trip, with a high that none of us probably fathom. But really, he is up there all alone. Even that twerp Carney can't explain it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,797 Posts
Good point Rick. It's funny that they will never admit that they were sold out by their own people, but that's another story.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,196 Posts
The check on the Executive is through the Supreme Court via the Legislative branch. The process is a lengthy one and enormous damage to the country can be done by a malevolent Executive. Witness the stuffing of the LRB by oldBummer 3 years ago. It is only now coming to the Court and it is expected that the Court will tell oldBummer that he can NOT make 'recess appointments' when the Senate is not, in fact, in Recess. Every ruling that body has made in 3 years will be null and void in that case and chaos will reign.

A malevolent Executive can destroy this country before the Court can act because of all the chickenshit 'rules' that have been adopted.

Don T
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,797 Posts
Notice how the whitewashed Benghazi report came out the other day, and he hasn't said anything about it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
18,797 Posts
Just to add to what Flash said- The Executive Order can be reversed in three ways.
I looked this up on Google via-Executive Orders.



1. The Supreme Court can knock down an E.O., by order that the president is trying to make law by circumventing Congress.(Sound familiar)



2. Congress can pass legislation that surpasses, or circumvents the E.O..



3. It can be rebuked, counter-manded or what ever by the next President, as Obama has done to a few of Bush's E.O.s.



Executive Orders have been used since Washington. F.D.R. had the most, which was during WWII. The most controversial E.O. was Roosevelt's E.O. to inter all the Japs during WWII.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top