# Hugo Chavez assassination-if the Pres. changed the law, ... **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 24, 2005, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356 "2005-08-24T00:30:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![RetroVertigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b38774/32.png) [@RetroVertigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RetroVertigo)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/1 "2005-08-24T00:30:18Z")
I didn’t notice a thread on the topic, so i decided to sign up a start one. If Pres. Bush follows the advice of Rev. Robertson and rescinded the executive order banning assassination of foreign, and then ordered the hit. Would he be legally obligated ---
**Author:** ![RetroVertigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b38774/32.png) [@RetroVertigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RetroVertigo)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/2 "2005-08-24T00:31:32Z")
sorry hit wrong button. would he be legally obligated to notify the American public of his actions. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/3 "2005-08-24T00:51:30Z")
Legality doesn’t enter into it. Assassination of foreign leaders has been explicity illegal under U.S. law for thirty years. This is exactly like asking “If George W. Bush decided to strangle Laura with his necktie and bury her in the Whitehouse basement, would he be legally obligated to hold a press conference about it?” It’s meaningless. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/4 "2005-08-24T01:06:46Z")
The reason it’s illegal is that a president in the past issued an executive order, isn’t it? Thus, the OP’s query regarding if a current president issued an executive order saying, “Well, it’s now okay.” ---
**Author:** ![RetroVertigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b38774/32.png) [@RetroVertigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RetroVertigo)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/5 "2005-08-24T01:09:38Z")
if Pres. Bush rescinded the order (executve order 11905, sec 5g). it would no longer against **American** law. so i don’t see how those would be considered similar crimes. So if he did order the assasination would he be obligated to tell the public that he did rescind the order, or would this be considered privileged information? ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/6 "2005-08-24T01:13:32Z")
Is the question, then, “Must executive orders always be public knowledge?” ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/7 "2005-08-24T01:14:04Z")
No. He’s under no obligation to notify the public. He could issue another executive order saying that in the case of Chavez the old order didn’t apply for reasons of ‘national security’ then have the sucker declared a Top Secret matter and go his merry way. It would eventually get out but almost certainly not during his term. Although, at this point, if Chavez stops a bullet there’ll be some stares. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/8 "2005-08-24T01:19:18Z")
I changed the title of the thread to more descriptively ask the question that the OP wished to ask… Titles! They’re your friend. **samclem** GQ moderator ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/9 "2005-08-24T01:33:21Z")
> [@Jonathan Chance](#): > > No. He’s under no obligation to notify the public. He could issue another executive order saying that in the case of Chavez the old order didn’t apply for reasons of ‘national security’ then have the sucker declared a Top Secret matter and go his merry way. > > It would eventually get out but almost certainly not during his term. > > Although, at this point, if Chavez stops a bullet there’ll be some stares. I don’t dispute what you’re saying. It just seems difficult to imagine how to argue the case. Somebody bumps off the Despot of Elbonia, and gets caught. Conclusive evidence Bush ordered the hit is siezed. “Foul!”, cry the Democrats, and demand Bush’s head. Bush whips out executive order XYZ: “Not any more!”. That whole arrangement just strikes me as bizarre. Bizarre isn’t a criterion to deny anything, necessarily, but it seems executive orders can be negated willy-nilly on the sly, and hence aren’t really worth all that much, if what you say is true. ---
**Author:** ![Diceman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Diceman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diceman)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/10 "2005-08-24T01:55:10Z")
> [@Loopydude](#): > > That whole arrangement just strikes me as bizarre. Bizarre isn’t a criterion to deny anything, necessarily, but it seems executive orders can be negated willy-nilly on the sly, and hence aren’t really worth all that much, if what you say is true. The other side of the coin is that an act of Congress can overturn any executive order, and there isn’t a thing the president can do except try to convince Congress to let him have his way. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/11 "2005-08-24T01:58:28Z")
But that seems to fit in perfectly well with our democracy and the concept of checks and balances. If the Legislative branch isn’t having any of what the Executive branch is doing, and they’ve got the votes, a _de facto_ law is overturned. Now, how on Earth can that arrangement work if executive orders are secret? ---
**Author:** ![RetroVertigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b38774/32.png) [@RetroVertigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RetroVertigo)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/12 "2005-08-24T02:00:13Z")
according to [wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order) most don’t have force as law. It seems that they are used almost like how a court would use precedent of law to rule on a case. so i guess if he wanted to he could ignore the order all together. **samclem** , :smack: sorry bout that. i’ll do better next time ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/13 "2005-08-24T02:15:32Z")
> [@](#): > > No. He’s under no obligation to notify the public. He could issue another executive order saying that in the case of Chavez the old order didn’t apply for reasons of ‘national security’ then have the sucker declared a Top Secret matter and go his merry way. > > It would eventually get out but almost certainly not during his term. > > Although, at this point, if Chavez stops a bullet there’ll be some stares. But if Bush gives a secret order to kill Chavez now, everyone will think it was Robertson who did it. It’s the perfect crime. Seriously, the purpose of issuing Executive Orders is not for the President to create a rule telling himself what he can do. Obviously that would be pointless. Executive Orders are to tell other federal employees what to do or not do. President Ford issued an order banning the assassination of foreign officials in order to tell people like CIA agents not to do that. But if another President decides he’s okay with the idea, he can give out a new order. An Executive Order is not a law, it’s just an order. Of course it’s an order from a high-tranking authority that many other people are required to obey by law. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2005, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hugo-chavez-assassination-if-the-pres-changed-the-law/318356/14 "2005-08-24T02:27:33Z")
> [@RetroVertigo](#): > > if Pres. Bush rescinded the order (executve order 11905, sec 5g). it would no longer against **American** law. so i don’t see how those would be considered similar crimes. :smack: I have _no_ idea how my eye slipped over such a significant portion of your OP. I’m sorry about that.