How about, “I’m the President, and as President, I’m issuing an EO”???
If someone doesn’t like it, they can take him to court. We’re only discussing what the possibilities are, right?
And when someone says “Why, Mr. President? On what grounds do you justify your decision? Do you really have the power to do that?” How does he answer?
No, we’re not only discussing what the possibilities are.
Hell, yeah: they could say, “we’ll agree to a continuing resolution only if it doesn’t include a dime for the ACA.”
But beyond that, if Romney wins and the GOP picks up 3 Senate seats, they can declare that reconciliation rules apply to an ACA repeal bill, and pass it with 50 votes plus the veep. It’s not like anyone so inclined will be in a position to tell them they can’t do that.
A President does have the authority to issue EO. How it’s justified will be written at that time.
If a President were to say, “Because I say so”, does that make the EO any less lawful? Such a President could be impeached by Congress or voted out of office by “We the People”. That President’s successor could then rescind the EO.
We are discussing what the “future” actions of Obama or Romney could be.
If it’s not otherwise lawful? Of course. There is no support in the constitution for the an executive “because I say so” power, which is why executive orders are subject to judicial review.
Yes, and yet again, I’m asking you what you think he might write.
No. But he probably wouldn’t.
So what do you think he’d say?
We’re trying to, at least.
Let’s not confuse the issue.
The President could issue an order. He isn’t required by the Constitution to justify it. It’s not unconstitutional to issue an order that simply says “because I say so.”
On the other hand, reporters and the public will demand an explanation, and then he’ll likely be asked by a court to justify it, so he probably will.
So I want to know what he could possibly say to justify it on constitutional grounds. Nobody has offered an answer yet.
I have no idea what Obama or Romney would say but I would justify my action by saying that -
Because the people of the U.S. have elected me President of the U.S. based on my position that I would overturn the Obamacare Tax, I hearby issue an EO that forbids the IRS from seeking any penalties related to Obamacare.
This would then be challenged in court.
On a more humorous note - I could then issue another EO instructing the IRS to give whomever challeges my previous EO a full-blown, cavity-searching, rubber-gloved audit. I would then expect to be brought up for impeachment.
Well, no, he’s almost certainly never going to do that. If that’s all he’s got (i.e. if that’s all you’ve got), it will never happen.
But then you could issue another EO to arrest and imprison the entire Congress so you can’t be impeached! No biggie.
Then the question becomes, what would be the point of giving an order you know that the court will strike down?
Because 1) you don’t know if the court will strike it down or 2) people who object to the law may believe it’s too much trouble or there isn’t enough time to mount a defense, or 3) you, in your capacity as President, believe it’s the right thing to do.
How many people knew HOW the Obamacare ruling would be handed down? It’s easy for people to say that the SCOTUS is a politically partial group but 5-4, 6-3, 7-2, 8-1, and 9-0 decision are issued every year. No one is ever going to get rich betting on Supreme Court decision.
I imagine that’s because you can’t prove a negative.
Really? So all those speeches he made trying to sell the program is doing nothing? Signing it into law is doing nothing?
I remember somebody else campaigning on/promising “No new taxes” and how well it worked out for him.
Obama didn’t campaign on “no new taxes”.
It’s nothing as far as the courts are concerned. He’s not part of the legislature. The courts are concerned about Congress’ intent, not Obama’s. Presidents don’t pass laws.
“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”
Candidate Barack Obama, Sept. 12, 2008
PolitiFact now scores this a Promise Broken.
Fair enough.
Thank you for that,** Really Not All That Bright**.
I may be dumb, but I’m not dumb 
It was a pretty stupidly broad statement. Candidates are good at that. I kept wondering what “my plan” he was talking about in the quote. It was his plan to rewrite the tax codes. I almost wanted to excuse that, but then his very next sentence is about contrasting McCain’s plans for heath care changes, so…:smack: He dug a pretty big hole to jump in with that one.
I did hang my hat on his “… any form of tax increase. …” and “…not any of your taxes." Peanut Gallery, but he provided that hatrack, didn’t he?