# Does Obama Have This Authority? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 16, 2010, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434 "2010-06-16T16:33:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![IAmNotSpartacus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/cc9497/32.png) [@IAmNotSpartacus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IAmNotSpartacus)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2010, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/21 "2010-06-16T19:23:57Z")
> [@Fuzzy\_Dunlop](#): > > Exxon was originally ordered to pay $5bn in punitive damages and after 20 years finally paid $507mm in punitive damages and $480mm in interest. So unless their legal fees were $4,000,000,000 the lesson from Exxon Valdez is that litigating and foot dragging is incredibly profitable. First, Exxon’s lawyers weren’t working for free. So you are partially correct about litigating and foot dragging being incredibly profitable… if you’re a lawyer representing them. Second, it would have been cheaper for them to settle in the first place. Cite: Exxon paid the Seattle Seven $63.75 million for their stake of the eventual settlement. After the SCOTUS ruling cutting the final judgment to $507.5 million, that stake was worth appx $116 million. [http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2008/06/attorneys-fees.html](http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2008/06/attorneys-fees.html) This figure is probably adjusted for the interest due, but they wouldn’t needed to pay for 20 years of lawyering to arrive at it. Note that punitive damages come from a trial, not a settlement fund, which I believe is exactly what BP is attempting to avoid. Third, according to Wikipedia, Exxon paid $2-3 billion in related clean up costs and civil penalties. BP obviously won’t be avoiding cleanup costs, but when the civil penalties are doled out they can argue a good-faith response to remedy their actions should mitigate their liability. Whether this holds up or not is a different story. It would have been cheaper for them to settle in the first place. Just like BP is purportedly doing now. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2010, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/22 "2010-06-16T19:28:40Z")
3rd party arbitration, which is what is going to happen, is pretty standard in a situation such as this. The statements made by the President were for public dissemination and not meant to convey any legal power. ---
**Author:** ![ChrisBooth12](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e95f7d/32.png) [@ChrisBooth12](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChrisBooth12)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2010, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/23 "2010-06-16T19:43:57Z")
The president can demand anything he wants. Just like you or me. the only difference is he is leader of the free world and one of the most powerful man on the planet. BP will probably listen regardless of his legal authority Besides once the money has been set up and spent what is to stop the justice department from suing anyway? Other then no one trusting his administration again ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2010, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/24 "2010-06-16T20:13:16Z")
As noted, Obama’s demands probably are or will be more of the “You really ought to do XYZ or Really Bad Things will surely happen to your company, which is hated in the U.S. right now” rather than the “I have the legal authority to make you do XYZ, and thus you must obey me” variety. Although he won’t be President, at the latest, after January 20, 2017, any agreement he signs with BP’s corporate leadership can be formalized, filed in court and made binding upon the U.S. government and his Oval Office successors. Only criminal laws cannot be _ex post facto_ in application. Civil laws can be and frequently are. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2010, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/25 "2010-06-16T20:14:39Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > [BP has already caved and agreed to the set-aside](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/us/politics/17obam)… Linky no worky. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2010, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/26 "2010-06-16T20:17:00Z")
BP has zero chance of winning, even partially, any negligence lawsuit. All that would happen is a loss of whatever good will they have left. They won’t try to defend one even in the earliest stages; everything will be a negotiated settlement. Obama’s just boxing BP in as part of setting the groundwork for any such negotiations. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2010, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/27 "2010-06-16T20:37:48Z")
Over and above what has already been said, a great deal of the discussion here has turned on whether Pres. Obama has the _constitutional_ authority to make such a demand. Do not forget that he is Chief Executive, charged with ensuring that the laws be duly administered and executed. If there is any provision requiring the EPA, or DHS, or some other Federal agency, to act in reference to oil spills, and I will bet wallabies to euroes there is, he may very well have statutory suthority to make this or a similar demand, in the name of the U.S. There will undoubtedly be a great deal of economic hardship on the Gulf Coast from this spill; the man who works seasonally doing maintenance for the chain motel, or crews a shrimp boat at need, or conducts swampland tours from a pirogue, is not in a position to sue BP – and will need help to survive and recover. Local businesses will be hurting. Major ports will be losing business. Even the other oil companies may have valid claims against BP for lost production and/or business. An Executive Order requires constitutional or statutory authority underlying it, to be sure, but Presidents are customarily accorded a great deal of deference in how they choose to carry out their duties, including the issuance of such Executive Orders as they see fit. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2010, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/28 "2010-06-16T20:40:53Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > Linky no worky. Sorry. Try it now. [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/us/politics/17obama.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/us/politics/17obama.html) ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2010, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/29 "2010-06-16T21:05:19Z")
Just a day or two ago CNN was reporting that Obama had the legal authority to make BP put money into to fund. Looking at Google - [BusinessWeek 6/15](http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06-15/obama-promises-revival-of-gulf-environment-economy-update2-.html) > [@](#): > > White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said today that the government has “the legal authority” to make BP place the money into an independently administered fund. [NPR](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127849858) > [@](#): > > INSKEEP: You said the legal authority you have. What authority do you have to force BP to hand over billions of dollars prior to losing some lawsuit? > > Mr. GIBBS: Well, again, we have legal authorities under the laws, as passed by the Congress, to deal with disasters such as this. And the president intends to use those authorities to ensure that the claims process for those damaged economically in the gulf is taken care of. > > INSKEEP: But do you have authority for the president to say to BP, its CEO Tony Hayward, give me money, give it now? > > Mr. GIBBS: Absolutely. BP is the responsible party. They have to pay for the cleanup, they have to pay for the restoration of the environmental damage that theyve done, and theyve got to pay the economic claims for those in the gulf region whose livelihoods have been damaged as a result of their mismanagement. > > And they have to pay now - not later, after a court proceeding. > > Mr. GIBBS: No, theyve got to pay now. They’re on the hook just as millions in the Gulf are on the hook for money that they may owe on a boat, money that they’re going to lose because they’re not fishing; or a hotel worker, a hotel owner who’s watching reservations for the summer be canceled. So even though it’s a done deal now, Obama approached this as a matter he had actual legal authority over. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2010, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/30 "2010-06-16T21:25:03Z")
> [@Triskadecamus](#): > > BP can choose to ignore the President’s “order” based on the absence of specific authority. The United States of America, both officially, and informally as a population would then have to seek other means of redress. Congress, of course could choose to grant authority over many matters involving BP. While ex post facto laws could not be included, there are a whole lot of things that will be decided in the next few years about what qualifies as “recovery” for the environs of the Gulf of Mexico, and the economic recovery of the region. > > Pissing off the American People right now might be an expensive choice, even if it is strictly legal. A lot of posters have made this general point. And it’s very true. Khodorovsky tried resisting Putin and look what happened to him. A lot of things were “legally” decided that didn’t exactly work out for him. But it’s a scary thought, if it might one day be you confronting the PTB. Right now BP is not very popular, so off with their heads by whatever authority necessary and find some way to make it legal. But guess what: you might not be so popular one day yourself. Consider. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2010, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/31 "2010-06-17T02:55:00Z")
> [@Nobody](#): > > Just a day or two ago CNN was reporting that Obama had the legal authority to make BP put money into to fund. They were reporting that somebody _said_ they had the authority. > [@Nobody](#): > > So even though it’s a done deal now, Obama approached this as a matter he had actual legal authority over. Pretty damn dubious, coming from the press secretary without a cited statute. I’d like to see where in the US Code the president is given actual statutory authority to make BP set up aside an escrow fund for this purpose. If he had such authority, he would have just issued an executive order exercising it, because it would have looked even tougher than summoning BP to the White House and demanding that they do it. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2010, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/32 "2010-06-17T03:04:13Z")
> [@friedo](#): > > They were reporting that somebody _said_ they had the authority. > > Pretty damn dubious, coming from the press secretary without a cited statute. I’d like to see where in the US Code the president is given actual statutory authority to make BP set up aside an escrow fund for this purpose. If he had such authority, he would have just issued an executive order exercising it, because it would have looked even tougher than summoning BP to the White House and demanding that they do it. Yeah, I’m curious too as to what specific laws or statues give him the authority. So far the only person I’ve heard made those comments are his press secretary. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2010, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/33 "2010-06-17T03:19:46Z")
Elendil’s Heir is right - the constitutional prohibition on ex post facto laws applies to criminal penalties, not civil penalties. _[Calder v. Bull](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=3&invol=386)_, 3 U.S. 386 (1798). When your company is in the middle of the first of many outraged congressional hearings over having caused one of the worst environmental disasters in history and the United States Attorney General’s boss is telling you that it’s in your best interest to start thinking of restitution now rather than later, it carries a little weight. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2010, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/34 "2010-06-17T04:51:41Z")
I don’t know about US pollution law. In Australia the relevant authorities can demand financial security against expected oil pollution prevention/cleanup costs. Maybe something similar is behind Obama’s statement. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2010, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/35 "2010-06-17T13:20:54Z")
Turns out the fact that Obama’s a Chicagoan gives him the power he needs here: [Chicago-Style Political Shakedown](http://rsc.tomprice.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=191125) > [@](#): > > “BP’s reported willingness to go along with the White House’s new fund suggests that the Obama Administration is hard at work exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics. These actions are emblematic of a politicization of our economy that has been borne out of this Administration’s drive for greater power and control. It is the same mentality that believes an economic crisis or an environmental disaster is the best opportunity to pursue a failed liberal agenda ---
**Author:** ![Kiber](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kiber/32/317_2.png) [@Kiber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kiber)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2010, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/36 "2010-06-17T13:53:16Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Was the Court system in this country dissolved yesterday when I was napping? Don’t we have jury trials and/or attorneys negotiating agreements that judges sign off on before any company or individual is “informed” that he/it is to set aside funds for anything? I’m actually surprised there’s any debate at all on this. Of course the President has the right to “inform” people of anything he wants. Hell - he can even “demand” people do stuff. He can pretty much “demand” anything he wants from anyone. Now - he might not be able to “force” BP to do anything. But he sure has hell can inform or demand of them. As it turns out - President’s “Demanding” stuff is pretty common. From a very quick Google search: [Bush Demands Amnesty for Spying Telecoms](http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/12/feds-eff-arguin/) [Bush Demands Senate Wraps Up Patriot Act](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179372,00.html) [Bush Demands “Bullying” Russia Gets Out Of Georgia](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1045071/Bush-demands-bullying-Russia-Georgia--Medvedev-warns-Moscow-respond-attacked.html) [Bush Demands Vote On Judges](http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/17/filibuster.fight/index.html) [Bush Demands Iran Explain Nuclear Program](http://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/bush-demands-iran-explain-nuke-program/) ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2010, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/37 "2010-06-18T23:54:04Z")
> [@Kiber](#): > > I’m actually surprised there’s any debate at all on this. Of course the President has the right to “inform” people of anything he wants. Hell - he can even “demand” people do stuff. He can pretty much “demand” anything he wants from anyone. > > Now - he might not be able to “force” BP to do anything. But he sure has hell can inform or demand of them. > > As it turns out - President’s “Demanding” stuff is pretty common. From a very quick Google search: > > [Bush Demands Amnesty for Spying Telecoms](http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/12/feds-eff-arguin/) > > [Bush Demands Senate Wraps Up Patriot Act](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179372,00.html) > > [Bush Demands “Bullying” Russia Gets Out Of Georgia](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1045071/Bush-demands-bullying-Russia-Georgia--Medvedev-warns-Moscow-respond-attacked.html) > > [Bush Demands Vote On Judges](http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/17/filibuster.fight/index.html) > > [Bush Demands Iran Explain Nuclear Program](http://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/bush-demands-iran-explain-nuke-program/) As I said earlier, I guess I am parsing words too narrowly. I think I am a well educated and informed person. When Obama said that he would “inform” the chairman to set aside funds, I assumed that he had such an authority. It seems that Gibbs feels that the President has that type of legal authority. Now I see from other posters that he was merely using the bully pulpit to persuade him to do so, and it seems to have worked. BTW, your links about Bush “demanding” things are only journalists’ takes on the situation. No way does a President demand that Congress passes anything. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2010, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434/38 "2010-06-19T00:37:02Z")
Actually, in one of the links I provided, Gibbs is saying that the President does have the legal authority to compel them to set aside money for the funds. I have no clue if it’s true or not, but that’s the assertion being made by the White House. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-obama-have-this-authority/543434.md?page=1)