Peculiar that nothing in our constitution provides such a power tool for presidents to dictate changes that would even go in contradiction with the constitutions it self and approved laws. But somehow, the executive order has being used and abused from the days of President Wilson. Interesting to notice that one of the chief complaints of the American colonists against King George was that he usurped powers that were not rightfully his, and then used those powers to the disadvantage of the people. There's an old saying that history often repeats itself, and so it has done concerning recent abuses of power by the executive branch. This is a most serious matter threatening the very structural foundation of freedom established by this nation's founders. Quote: James Madison, quoting Montesquieu in the Federalist Papers No. 47, stated, "There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates." Are we really a democracy or just a corporate state? :m:
You don’t have it as well as many European democracies don’t have it, because you don’t brag about been “The” democracy or most free country on the planet. We are the land of the free, you get it? ..God is always asked to bless us, you finally got it? ..dammed! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
CAUSE FOR ALARM Americans should be deeply alarmed that those presidents have signed a series of executive orders (EOs) which, under the guise of any national emergency declared by the president serving at the time, can virtually suspend the Constitution and convert the nation into a virtual dictatorship. Dissent, peaceful or otherwise, is eliminated. Those backing efforts to circumvent the Constitution may have gotten the idea from President Abraham Lincoln, whose use of various extraordinary powers of his office -- which many Constitutional scholars still insist was illegal -- suspended various civil rights to curb such problems as draft riots during the Civil War. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
FBI out of hand! By virtue of the USA Patriot Act, the FBI has ample resources to spy on individuals within the United States that are suspected of possible terror links. They are given permission through expanded authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, a secret court that previously granted warrants only in foreign surveillance cases, but now hands out permission to snoop on criminal activities at home. In November, a panel of federal judges ruled for the Justice Department in an appeal by the court itself saying DOJ was overstepping its bounds in making requests for wiretap and other surveillance powers. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
By EO After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, within days the FBI rounded up tens of thousands of Japanese- ericans, guilty only of being of Japanese ancestry, under the authority of an executive order issued by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The lists of those to be apprehended had been drawn up months earlier, before the war. Held in concentration camps, the perimeters guarded by U.S. soldiers armed with machine guns, the mostly innocent and patriotic Japanese- Americans were not released until after the war. :m:
The executive in war has always enjoyed special privileges as CinC. This goes back further than Abraham Lincoln. John Adams passed the first Alien and Sedition Acts at the end of the 18th century during the Quasi War with France. The Federalists feared that many of the newly arriving immigrants would favor the French over the British, both of whom were raiding US shipping. The problem with the Constitution is that it does not specifically state the duties of the executive during war; it only states the president shall become CinC of the army and navy, as well as the militias. However, it also does not specifically deny powers to the president, and for that reason there has always been the argument of 'implied powers', that by giving the president control of the military, he should be able to do what is necessary to conduct the war in a manner as efficiently as possible, both abroad and at home. The idea comes from the early Roman republic, when during war a leader would be given powers of dictatorship to expedite the war in a timely and efficient manner, doing whatever he deemed necessary. The idea of arguing 'implied powers' was given precedent by Hamilton's argument for a national bank. The problem is presidents signing EOs during peacetime. It has to be considered a law to have any weight of enforcement, and of course laws are in the domain of the Congress. The problem has been too often that a spineless or partisan Congress has allowed presidents to ignore constitutional law.
