So, I'm a little fuzzy on what you can and can't do with an executive order

[Tab]

Today, President Obama signed 23 executive orders of things like funding school protection programs, incorporating a mentally ill database into gun licensing considerations, and so forth, but for things like banning assault weapons and high-capacity clips, he had to defer to congress. Was that purely strategic, or where is the line drawn betwixt what you are and aren't allowed to decree by executive order?

BTW, I know historically executive orders were few and far between, so as to not appear to circumvent congress, but in later years they've become more standard.

[hack89]

1. They cannot change or override existing legislation

which why most are administrative in nature.

[struggle4progress]

2. An executive order is typically directed at federal agencies' interpretation and

implementation of federal law. The President, as chief executive, is the head of these agencies and primarily has the power and authority to direct their function

Executive orders are not historically all that rare

[PoliticAverse]

3. Executive orders are part of the President's ability to manage the Executive branch of the gov...

Excellent starting point for education on the issue...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order

[1-Old-Man]

4. All they can do is direct the Executive Agency heads to emphasize this or that ....

They are not law, the President is no King. He can not issue orders to his subjects, that is the job of the Congress. What the President can do is direct the heads of his Agencies in how to deploy their resources, and that is what an Executive Order does. He can also order them to suspend programs that are being challenged in Court and make other executive use of the orders. The point is that they do not apply to you or me, but they can effect services we receive from our Government.

[pipoman]

5. Executive order really aren't rare at all..

[zbdent]

6. they sure as hell weren't rare

2001-1/19/2009

[pipoman]

7. nope

[brooklynite]

8. Let me give you a real-life example...

The Congress regularly approves a budget for construction funds to be given to localities for public transportation. The DOT, as Administrator of the funding distribution, develops regulations that localities who want federal funding have to follow (environmental analysis, cost estimates, public engagement, progress reports, etc.) to assist in determining who should get money and how much. However, in addition, President Clinton issued an Executive Order (still in force), requiring the DOT to also analyze the "Environmental Justice" impacts of each proposal, e.g. whether the project would disproportionately impact low income citizens or ethnic minorities.

[msanthrope]

9. You cannot override a law of Congress with an EO, but you can set Executive Policy....

For example, the President could not have used an EO to override DADT, but desegregation of the military could be done by EO because there was no congressional law mandating it--it was policy of the military that could be regulated by the CIC.

There are a few court cases that speak to the limits of Executive Power--this one is a good starting point.


https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/343/579/case.html

[okaawhatever]

10. What I learned was in 1952 there was a scotus case defining xo's. They determined

that a president could expound on, update, clarify an existing law. That is how George H.W. Bush did it. He used either the 1968 Gun Control Act or 1963 laws in existence. From what I understand, his son W. Bush did it using the national security issue.

The constitutional question was, were there any previous laws where he could expound on the central issue. I read that he could use the 1933 National Firearms Act, which said that a federal tax must be paid on firearms or the 1939 Federal Firearms Act. It required gun dealers be licensed. Those two laws would cover much of what he wanted to do.

Other laws he could expound on:
1986 Banned the use of cop killing bullets & weapons undetectable to xray machines
1988 Banned machine guns


So from what I understood, it's about having the authority on laws already passed by congress, and updating or clarifying them. Now, with alot of those they are xo's but they aren't funded. Congress will have to pass laws to fund them. Ha ha Obama 1 Congress 0!