In the discussion thread: Let's ASSUME that the mandate and the whole bill is shot down.. [View all]
Response to Rosco T. (Original post)
Sat Mar 31, 2012, 11:58 AM
jzodda (1,735 posts)
28. This can't be done via executive order
Last edited Sat Mar 31, 2012, 12:02 PM - Edit history (1)
You can't unilateral change the scope of a law that requires funding via the budget without input from Congress. You can bet that the law itself has provisions limiting what a branch of gov can do to it without input from the other branch/branches.
Executive orders are overwhelmingly used where Congress has not acted (fills a void)
Additionally, this would be bad for something like this because another administration can wipe it away with the signing of a pen stroke.
I have also never heard of anything so significant being done by executive order. It is a huge and unprecedented use of Presidential power that I will tell you 100% would not survive challenge in Federal Court.
and all the posters who are mentioning the use of wartime powers-Well this is different all together. The President has huge powers given to him via existing law on where to and how to deploy our military. These powers have been used for centuries and even the War-powers act has not constrained them much.
This is a different animal and effects domestic policy and almost 20% of our total economy. It also requires funding which will require input from the House. To do this via executive order only would create a Constitutional crisis in an election year.
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
|Rosco T.||Mar 2012||OP|
|sofa king||Mar 2012||#21|
|sofa king||Mar 2012||#27|
|Rosco T.||Mar 2012||#5|
|Rosco T.||Mar 2012||#13|
|sofa king||Mar 2012||#22|
|sofa king||Mar 2012||#32|
This can't be done via executive order
Please login to view edit histories.