Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SE Mom; onyx
I know I am screaming into the wind but that EO is not legally binding...a President can not nullify a section of a law by EO...from NRO.

The Susan B. Anthony List observation that EOs can be rescinded at the president's whim is of course true. This particuar EO is also a nullity — presidents cannot enact laws, the Supreme Court has said they cannot impound funds that Congress allocates, and (as a friend points out) the line-item veto has been held unconstitutional, so they can't use executive orders to strike provisions in a bill. So this anti-abortion EO is blatant chicanery: if the pro-lifers purport to be satisfied by it, they are participating in a transparent fraud and selling out the pro-life cause.

3,410 posted on 03/21/2010 1:38:21 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3393 | View Replies ]


To: Dog

Oh, Stupak will claim the “right wing court” stopped the president from fixing the bill.


3,439 posted on 03/21/2010 1:42:17 PM PDT by HonestConservative (When Injustice becomes law, resistence becomes duty. Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3410 | View Replies ]

To: Dog; holdonnow

I hope you are right. I am anticipating court challenges, we should find out tomorrow night when Mark comes on.


3,448 posted on 03/21/2010 1:43:39 PM PDT by rodguy911 ( Sarah 2012!!! Home of the free because of the brave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3410 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson