The post on Jonathan Turley’s testimony at yesterday’s House hearing was well received, so here’s another seven minutes on executive power grabs from the same proceeding. Simple question from Gowdy to the legal panel: How far can Obama go? Now that he’s claimed the royal prerogative to not enforce immigration law against young illegals, not enforce O-Care’s employer mandate against businesses, and not enforce the new rules about “essential benefits” against insurers who un-cancel old plans, what else can he choose not to enforce? If Congress imposes a mandatory minimum sentence for certain offenses, presumably Obama could refuse to enforce that by granting blanket commutations for thousands of people convicted of those offenses. Presumably he could also refuse to enforce election laws. Why not? What’s the limiting principle?
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
Nobody ever tries to explain why this is so. The US has been in a constant state of emergency since the 30's. That suspends the Constitution, and is the basis for most if not every Presidential directive, order, signing statement, etc. since.
ReplyDeleteHe ignores the Constitution, he ignores the Rule of Law, he ignores the will of the People.
ReplyDeleteTo 1:30 pm, they who profit from usurping usually assume power which leads to control which allows for suppression of dissenters.
ReplyDelete