Skip to comments.Liberal Prof.: Obama Has Brought Us To ‘Constitutional Tipping Point’
Posted on 02/27/2014 1:38:57 AM PST by cowpoke
During testimony before the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday, liberal constitutional professor Jonathan Turley said that the growth of executive power is accelerating and that the growth of such power has brought us to a constitutional tipping point. I believe we are now at a constitutional tipping point in our system, Turley, who teaches law at George Washington University, said. Its a dangerous point for our system to be in, and I believe that your response has to begin before this president leaves office. No one in our system goes it alone....
The “Lady Professor” said it even STRONGER that Congress better take it’s power back.
He doesn't see the fundamental corruption visited by the 17th Amendment to the exquisite design of our Framers.
<>Some pull quotes from his prepared statement:<>
The very fact that we are having this hearing captures how far we have drifted from our original constitutional origins.
I believe considerable blame rests not with the political branches but with the Judicial Branch.
The removal of the federal courts from the equation in these conflicts has placed even greater stress on the system of checks and balances. However, the measures available to Congress are no substitute for judicial review, particularly given the changes in our federal system.
Today, the vast majority of laws governing the United States are not passed by Congress but are issued as regulations. Recently, this Supreme Court added to this insulation and authority with a ruling that agencies can determine their own jurisdictionsa power that was previously believed to rest with Congress.
The Executive Branch routinely moves billions of dollars around in discretionary or undesignated funding. Cutting off the funding of a given part of the government does not have immediate impacts and may in fact not prevent funding as intended.
The other oft-cited power checking the Executive Branch is direct legislative action and oversight authority. Once again, however, recent years have shown how presidents can insulate themselves from legislative inquiry into questions of misconduct or misappropriation.
I previously testified that I believe that President Obama clearly violated the Constitution in his recess appointment of Richard Cordray to serve as the first Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and three individuals to the National Labor Relations Board.
The solution to this crisis will not be found in the impeachment clause.
I have repeatedly testified before Congress on the single most valuable change that would counter the usurpation of legislative authority: legislative or member standing.
Any change in the Article III limitations would have to come from that same Court. The only alternative would be a constitutional amendment. The situation is, in my view, so serious that I believe we may have to consider such a move, even though I have long opposed constitutional amendments as a general principle. I have been reluctant to suggest such a resolution because I believe the Court is dead wrong on standing and that this is a barrier created by the courts rather than the Constitution.
And Congress is thinking about law suits vice impeachment because they don’t “think” Americans are up to it and the Senate wouldn’t vote on it. Impeachment should be initiated and passed in the House. That would send a signal at a minimum but what’s really needed is a massive protest in DC to back it up and not a one day weekend protest....
He mentions "the truth about Bengazi" in passing.
Good post. I’m no lawyer, but I agree that the argument about the need for standing is a legal dodge. The illegal enforcement or non-enforcement of laws should cause standing just by the “fact of”. People alter behavior because of it, and you shouldn’t need to prove it - it should be self-evident.
Perhaps the amount of impact should affect the punishment. That is, for example, if it’s merely “fact of”, the minimum should be censure, and if it continues, removal from office. If it was catastrophic damage to a nation, then Life Imprisonment.
Segal is one of my all time favorites as an action actor.
I am listening the video link as I type this.
I must say, however, I do not understand that ring of hair
on his face. That is disappointing. The man is much better looking without it.
As hard as it is to emotionally agree, he actually touched on the fundamental design of our Framers’ constitution. Their system did not rely on, as Madison put it, “parchment barriers” to secure freedom. They divided power, first vertically between the states and the government they created, and secondly through horizontal separation of power among the three branches.
In this battle, since we are talking about constitutional amendments anyway, I prefer Mark Levin's approach. His suggested amendments would re-federalize the government more than the Framers’ design. Instead of endless lawsuits whose outcome is up to the whims of nine black-robes, the interests of states, as represented in a senate of the states, would be far more likely to take care of executive branch overreach before it happened.
Massive protest = shutdown.
Turley's way of saying it's time for 'impeachment!'
Strikes me as humorous that what I saw in Obammy 6 years ago, the elite, highly educated libs are just now noticing. They are soo much smarter than us little people.
Yes, but he doesn’t regret his vote and would likely support him in a future election, if one were constitutionally possible.
Seagal is a good man and is correct.
Maybe he knew he had to lay low after that speech. Lol
“Maybe he knew he had to lay low after that speech. Lol”
Yes, in today’s USSA, free speech can be expensive.
Turley said this when Bush was President too, so we’ve passed a couple of tipping points. Pardon me if I don’t strike up a band over his testimony.
” it’s always the lefty types that are the downtrodden fighting fot their lives in a post apocalyptic world.”
Lefties expect the world to be a bowl of cherries, with all of their needs provided for them by dear leader.
When that does not work, they blame it on the productive and evil capitalist.
Liberal professor forgot to add
“And I’M LOVIN’ IT!!!