Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 1001 posts

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#541

Post by shostack »

codewench wrote: post #515
arunabha wrote: post #503

In general, people are going to interpret this EO with their own lens. Unsurprisingly, reasonable people may disagree on the merits of the EO as a whole. However this part of the EO is pretty concerning > 'The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch' and later > 'No employee of the executive bra…

> Nothing prevents the next president from having a radically different opinion. Of course, this is only relevant if they are interested in having a 'next' president, something which it seems a segment of society is less than open to.

Trump has explicitly said it's the last time people will have to vote. I don't know why people are glossing over this. He intends to take full control and never give it up. The time to act is now, not when he announces some emergency that is a thin excuse to cancel elections.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#542

Post by bagels »

noah_buddy wrote: post #302
kasey_junk wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s scared of them. If he were to mess with the Fed it would impact Wall Street, particularly by making the market indices go down. For whatever reason he cares about that in ways he doesn’t care about his approval ratings or the historical norms of the office. See how fast he reached a deal on tariffs earlier in the month when the markets reacted to them? Since then they’ve been slowly leading tariffs to get the me…

His approval rating is quite high considering the circumstances. Will take months to really understand, but at least half of America abhors the federal government.

Can you imagine if the media were actually reporting on what's happening honestly, especially Fox News?

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#543

Post by dizzant »

arunabha wrote: post #503

In general, people are going to interpret this EO with their own lens. Unsurprisingly, reasonable people may disagree on the merits of the EO as a whole. However this part of the EO is pretty concerning > 'The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch' and later > 'No employee of the executive bra…

In the second quote, the phrases "in their official capacity" and "as the position of the United States" are doing a lot of heavy lifting.

The EO is going out of its way to broadcast that its purpose is to establish a unitary policy position of the executive branch that stems from the President, rather than having "independent" agencies providing contrary position from within "in their official capacity" "as the position of the United States." The logical leap from there to "the President's (unrestricted) opinion is the law (without reference to Congress or the Courts)" is vast.

The EO does not bear on the balance of powers between branches of government, but on the ability for the executive branch to function as a single entity within that balance, rather than a multiplicity of quasi-"independent" agencies.

The disincentives that have always prevented the executive from blatantly violating the law are still in force and unchanged. They have been functional through 250 years of Presidents testing the limits of their authority.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#544

Post by eadmund »

axus wrote: post #327
Zamaamiro wrote: post #258

This EO, combined with his proclamation that "He who saves the country does not violate any law" paint a very concerning picture. This has, historically speaking, been the language of tyrants. No President is above the law, nor does the President "interpret" the law; that is the domain of the Judiciary. “Wherever law ends, tyranny begins”

The Supreme Court literally said that Trump has absolute immunity for criminal use of presidential power. Combined with the statistical impossibility of a 2/3 senate majority for impeachment, this is a license to grab as much power as that same court will allow.

I don’t think that’s an accurate description of the decision. I think that it stated that when the President exercises core constitutional power (e.g. the pardon power, or the veto power) then the exercise itself cannot be illegal. I’m not sure if the decision of the Court left open the possibility that the conduct around the exercise of such power can be illegal. If so, then this could be a distinction without much difference: for example, issuing a pardon may not itself ever be criminal, but taking a bribe to issue a pardon is separate from issuing the pardon itself. To some extent, I think that some of this does flow from the structure of the Constitution itself, but I’m not convinced that phrasing it in terms of immunity is particularly helpful.

Then there’s a rebuttable presumption of immunity for more conduct. I don’t see that this flows from the Constitution, but perhaps it flows from judicial decisions over the past two centuries? ‘When the President does something official, he probably is immune, but maybe he’s not, and he could still be prosecuted from crimes he commits around the immune act’ doesn’t seem terribly meaningful.

It sounds a bit to me like saying that a citizen is immune from prosecution for his vote, but not for selling it or whatever. But I’m not a lawyer, and I could be wrong.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#546

Post by bagels »

arunabha wrote: post #503

In general, people are going to interpret this EO with their own lens. Unsurprisingly, reasonable people may disagree on the merits of the EO as a whole. However this part of the EO is pretty concerning > 'The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch' and later > 'No employee of the executive bra…

They're trying to leverage the immunity the Supreme Court gave him to extend to people following his orders.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#547

Post by ceejayoz »

hiatus wrote: post #531
ceejayoz wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“No employee of the executive branch acting in their official capacity may advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion on a matter of law“ would seem to rule out, say, accepting a SCOTUS ruling against the President, should he insist it was wrongly decided.

Does any law or executive order say "unless invalidated by a court"? Isn't that kind of a given?

“John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.”

They are openly contesting the authority of the courts in various statements.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gx3j5k63xo.amp

> Vice-President JD Vance has suggested judges do not have authority over the Trump administration's executive power, as the White House responds to a flurry of lawsuits that aim to stall its agenda. "Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power," he wrote on X.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#548

Post by bagels »

codewench wrote: post #515
arunabha wrote: post #503

In general, people are going to interpret this EO with their own lens. Unsurprisingly, reasonable people may disagree on the merits of the EO as a whole. However this part of the EO is pretty concerning > 'The President and the Attorney General, subject to the President’s supervision and control, shall provide authoritative interpretations of law for the executive branch' and later > 'No employee of the executive bra…

> Nothing prevents the next president from having a radically different opinion. Of course, this is only relevant if they are interested in having a 'next' president, something which it seems a segment of society is less than open to.

There is no next legitimately elected president. They are going to disenfranchise us.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#549

Post by xnx »

nielsbot wrote: post #518
NotYourLawyer wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nor does the President "interpret" the law; that is the domain of the Judiciary Everyone tasked with enforcing a law must necessarily interpret its meaning. The judiciary gets the final say though.

Who will enforce following the law if the executive branch ignores the judicial? In theory the military is sworn to defend the constitution, but if the DOD is headed by a Trump loyalist (it is), then what?

> Who will enforce following the law if the executive branch ignores the judicial?

Congress through impeachment. If they don't do that, all bets are off.

Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order

#550

Post by alistairSH »

hiatus wrote: post #531
ceejayoz wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“No employee of the executive branch acting in their official capacity may advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion on a matter of law“ would seem to rule out, say, accepting a SCOTUS ruling against the President, should he insist it was wrongly decided.

Does any law or executive order say "unless invalidated by a court"? Isn't that kind of a given?

Pre-2016, you’d be correct

Today? It’s no longer a given. Trump, Vance, and Musk have all indicated a willingness to ignore court orders. Whether they will go they far is yet to be seen.

Post reply on HN