Reply to Thread

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mugsy" data-source="post: 1987932" data-attributes="member: 18914">Nor are e-mails mentioned - does mean the Executive can't use them as ways to direct his staff? You are confusing a means (the EO) of executing already established/authorized duties with  the original authority grant.The EO does not establish authority nor can it authorize anything not already supported under the law.  EOs should be merely a way for the Executive to direct his branch's operations.  Something clearly and Constitutionally under his purview.As I stated earlier, IF the Executive tries to do anything not already authorized by law or within his legitimate discretionary power then he is subject to court challenge or political blow-back from the Legislative branch.I think folks here are confusing the general case of Executive Orders with some very specific Presidential "Signing Statements".  Signing Statements have been used as a form of Presidential formal reservation stated as he signs a law - those are, IMO, clearly without force of law as the Constitution makes no mention of the President having any opportunity beyond the Veto to amend or affect laws.  He can't simply decide he won't follow a part of the law if he doesn't like it.  Though, he can try to make a Constitutional argument that to follow some part of a law would force him to violate a part of the Constitution - then it probably winds up in the Supreme Court at some point.</blockquote>