Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the Supreme Court and Congress has no enforcement power, though, what recourse is there?
sic semper tyrannis
This could be construed as a threat, given they were the words of Lincoln's assassin.
"Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
811–820 of 1001 posts
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#812Earlier quoted context omitted.
All three branches of the government are beholden to the Constitution as a whole, and to each other based on the Constitutional roles and their expressions of their roles. All government actors individually are also responsible to the Constitution and its expression by all three branches first , before any loyalty to anyone else. In the same branch or not. Even before the current top office holders of the executive b…
> Saying that a President’s personal interpretation of Congress’ laws or the courts precedence, completely overrides any individual executive employees good faith understanding and responsibility to the Constitution, laws, and judicial rulings is madness. But it's not madness based on the intended structure of government? The EO isn't saying "ignore Constitutional violations". It wouldn't be valid if it did. If Congr…
> The executive branch of government is more accurately viewed as a monolithic organization which derives 100% of it's authority by delegation from the US President
That is inaccurate. Almost all federal departments and agencies derive their authority from acts of Congress. The President has very limited authority to create and empower agencies.
The strongest argument against the CFPB is that is was not created by an act of Congress. Trump could not create a DOGE so he renamed the USDS. He cannot shut down USAID, but he can mismanage it.
The president is required by law to execute the laws passed by Congress even if he strongly disagrees. The mass firings and funding holds have the legal fig leaf that he is managing them to the best of his ability.
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#813Earlier quoted context omitted.
>setting up the president as the sole power center is an inherently unstable system. But that is what the Constitution specifies (Article II Section 1): > The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. I find it funny people either don't know this or are intentionally ignoring it. The entire power is vested in one person, who can delegate the enforcement of it to lower officers. >…
[flagged]
Where do people think the agency derives 100% of it's power from? The President!
You clearly do not understand how the American system of governance is supposed to work. Every department has enabling legislation. Below is a link to a law passed by Congress and signed by the President establishing the DOJ.
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/jmd/legacy/2013/...
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#814In 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…
>setting up the president as the sole power center is an inherently unstable system. But that is what the Constitution specifies (Article II Section 1): > The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. I find it funny people either don't know this or are intentionally ignoring it. The entire power is vested in one person, who can delegate the enforcement of it to lower officers. >…
When Congress passes a law saying, "create an agency that sets rules about air pollution, whose director is appointed by the president", the constitution demands that the executive branch do exactly that. Interpreting that to mean "The president personally sets rules about air pollution, using an agency if he likes" is unconstitutional and I think the vast majority of both parties agreed on this for most of the last hundred years.
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#815Earlier quoted context omitted.
All three branches of the government are beholden to the Constitution as a whole, and to each other based on the Constitutional roles and their expressions of their roles. All government actors individually are also responsible to the Constitution and its expression by all three branches first , before any loyalty to anyone else. In the same branch or not. Even before the current top office holders of the executive b…
> Saying that a President’s personal interpretation of Congress’ laws or the courts precedence, completely overrides any individual executive employees good faith understanding and responsibility to the Constitution, laws, and judicial rulings is madness. But it's not madness based on the intended structure of government? The EO isn't saying "ignore Constitutional violations". It wouldn't be valid if it did. If Congr…
Say something like "hey, no, that law is unconstititional!".
What is the purpose of having cabinet secretaries swear an oath to defend the Constitution if the President has the sole authority to decide what this means?
Why do you support Trump being an autocrat?
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#816Earlier quoted context omitted.
>setting up the president as the sole power center is an inherently unstable system. But that is what the Constitution specifies (Article II Section 1): > The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. I find it funny people either don't know this or are intentionally ignoring it. The entire power is vested in one person, who can delegate the enforcement of it to lower officers. >…
When Congress passes a law saying, "create an agency that sets rules about air pollution, whose director is appointed by the president", the constitution demands that the executive branch do exactly that. Interpreting that to mean "The president personally sets rules about air pollution, using an agency if he likes" is unconstitutional and I think the vast majority of both parties agreed on this for most of the last…
If Congress disagrees they have ways to override the president. They can pass new laws or even impeach him.
But unless the dems get 2/3 the senate that will never happen.
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#817As Americans that believe in the Republic, what exactly are we supposed to do about this? Should we continue to implore congress to take action against this lawless behavior?
I think that the most effective way to get change would be if the economy tanked, that's the one thing the electorate seems to be motivated by. A general strike would be one way to do that, but I doubt that one could be organized on any meaningful scale. I'd love to be wrong about that. I'm trying to restrict my spending as much as possible. No new car, no vacation (or at least nothing big), limiting eating out, etc.…
I’m gonna be straight with you. I used to think this way — that living small was a form of protest against the ills of society. But life is too short. For many of us, that cardiac arrest, car accident, or pandemic-related terminal illness is right around the corner. Don’t say no to things that bring meaning, joy, purpose, and expansion to your life. You only have one life to live.
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#818Earlier quoted context omitted.
Naive interpretations like this one, of bad faith actions is how we get there. This same assumption of good faith was wholly present in peoples' responses to project 2025 prior to the election. They are not acting in good faith. Try restating the problem: Why is this EO being issued? What problem, other than judicial review, does it solve for the executive branch? EDIT: For those who do not think this contributes any…
> What problem, other than judicial review, does it solve for the executive branch? It’s fairly obvious on its face the concern of the EO is not judicial review but about agencies that nominally are past of the branch the President heads determining interpretations of law contrary to what the head of the executive desires. And, it does genuinely seem weird to have an executive branch where the head of that branch doe…
> no one would bat an eye if this were Barack Obama reigning in some executive agency
Obviously a counterfactual we can never truly know but I'd remind you that the right were offended when Obama wore a tan suit and was using Dijon mustard. I'm pretty sure they'd "bat an eye" if he were attempting even 1% of the shenanigans that Trump is pulling.
Re: "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" – Executive Order
#819In 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…
A self-coup.