A Government of Laws, or of Men?
So how does this one play out? Down in New Orleans, Federal District Judge Martin Feldman is holding the Obama Administration in contempt over their refusal to lift the ban on deep water oil drilling. “Each step the government took following the court’s imposition of a preliminary injunction showcases its defiance,” wrote Judge Feldman, adding:
Such dismissive conduct, viewed in tandem with the re-imposition of a second blanket and substantively identical moratorium, and in light of the national importance of this case, provide this court with clear and convincing evidence of the government’s contempt.
Last June, the Judge had overturned original moratorium on deep water drilling as excessively broad. Interior Secretary Kenneth Salazar responded with a second ban the very next month. Feldman had found that the enhanced safety rules imposed by the federal government were violation of its own laws, and accordingly struck those down as well. Regulators, however, continued imposing those rules as well.
Jim Adams, President of the Offshore Marine Service Association, said that:
President Obama claims to have lifted the Gulf moratorium, yet not a single deepwater [sic] permit has been issued in nine months. … As a result, thousands of workers are out of jobs, Americans are paying more for gasoline and heating oil, and our nation is becoming even more dependent on unstable nations for our energy needs.
Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security has ignored a request for documentation from House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R – CA). The two week deadline for submission of the documents has expired, prompting Issa to observe that:
While the Department has announced its intention to cooperate with the Committee, I was disappointed to learn that on or about January 20, 2011, DHS’s Office of General Counsel instructed career staff in the Privacy Office not to search for documents responsive to my request.
One of the most intransigent problems the Republican majority will face will be the Administrative branch. Unelected, unaccountable, and supremely arrogant, administrative agencies are acting in contravention of judicial rulings and congressional requirements. The question is posed again; do we have a government of laws or of men? It appears we have a government that holds certain laws and representatives of the people in contempt. What then are the options for response?
- Comment (20)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
Perp walk.
Jun '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
Constitutional crisis leading to impeachment? Calling Mr. Yoo and Mr. Epstein . . .
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
Don't forget that the Administration has not appealed or requested a stay of Judge Vinson's order declaring the entire Affordable Care Act [sic] unconstitutional. Obama spokesmen are just ignoring the ruling entirely and continuing with implementation. When pressed, the argument runs as follows: 1) some courts before Judge Vinson found the law constitutional; and 2) this is judicial activism.
No notice from the MSM that the Administration is openly violating a valid federal court order. Until a higher court weighs in differently, ObamaCare is dead as a doornail...but nobody at the White House seems to care.
[Edited to replace text eaten by the Ricochet text edit window]
Edited on Feb 3, 2011 at 4:08pmJul '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
Well, We have people at the top of Our federal government regularly referred to as "czars," and they embrace it when they should be insulted. Speaks volumes to Me.
Jun '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
When one has been anointed by Gaia to fundamentally transform the country (and the world), it's just too inconvenient to comply with the law.
People like Dave Carter, John Yoo, Judge Feldman, and those with a Ricochet view of the world, are not just wrong, we're evil.
Joseph Epstein: "Disagree with someone on the right and he is likely to think you obtuse, wrong, foolish, a dope. Disagree with someone on the left and he is more likely to think you selfish, a sell-out, insensitive, possibly evil."
Jun '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
The oil companies, if they aren't crony capitalists like GE, should immediately resume offshore drilling. The 26 States who won the Florida lawsuit against Obamacare should immediately stop all implementation of the unconstitutional un-law. Issa should immediately issue subpoenas to Napolitano, Salazar, and all chiefs of staff of Homeland Security and Interior.
This administration started out breaking the laws of bankruptcy with the Chrysler bondholders. I might mention that GWB also broke the law by using TARP funds, against specific language disallowing such usage, to loan money to GM and Chrysler at the end of his tenure.
We have a serious problem in this country. It seems the only people who must follow the law are ordinary American citizens. If you are here illegally or are a high ranking politician, not so much.
An excellent synopsis of Obama's lawlessness by GW at wolfhowling blogspot:
http://wolfhowling.blogspot.com/2011/02/obamas-lawless-thugocracy.html
May '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
Remind me again: how often does the Obama administration let a crisis go to waste?
Private industry is bad, so stimulus funds overwhelmingly grew government. Insurance companies are bad, so Obamacare destroys them. Drilling for oil is bad, so it's forbidden. If Fox asks for an explanation of how the White House treatment cures the ailment, the press secretary scoffs and the others giggle before scurrying to the next subject.
Right now, we have a government of men - and for the most part, the 2010 election was "what we can do about it." Nothing would drive independents back to President Obama like serious talk of impeachment and the media lionization of him that would result. Hooray for Darrell Issa!
Dec '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
We have a government of men and face serious adversaries. Yes, they have ignored Feldman, but they have also ignored Hudson, and Vinson. They have also ignored the federal court and congress, with respect to the FCC having jurisdiction over the internet.
However, pay close attention to the weapons being used by the adversaries. There is no ban on deep water drillling, currently in effect. The new moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico is for the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, not the Central or Western, where the deep water drilling is done. The order from the Department of the Interior is to focus all permit and safety reviewing assets on the deep water permit applications, stopping them by review, not by moratorium. There is no new moratorium on deep water permit applications for drilling. There is quicksand below, while the folks with interest in the Central and Western Gulf are carrying shields over their heads.
Judge Feldman is, in my opinion, mistaken. He is missing what the Administration really did. They excluded all other areas not currently being permitted and focused all permit review efforts on the only areas currently available for drilling. Tricky. Purposeful.
May '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
Congress should defund these agencies or sub-agencies, hold them out of the budget until such time as they comply with its requests and the rulings of the courts. I believe that the remedy the Founders envisioned in disputes between the branches of government was that each could use its distinctive constitutional powers to pressure the other to respect its prerogatives.
When Federal bureaucrats find themselves without paychecks or heat or light or cleaning services for a while, they might acquire a bit more respect for the People's elected representatives.
Aug '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
EPA has got to go ! Lisa Jackson, Carol Browner?? Where do these tsarinas come from ?
Dec '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
Daniel Frank
...When Federal bureaucrats find themselves without paychecks or heat or light or cleaning services for a while, they might acquire a bit more respect for the People's elected representatives.
In practice, this is exactly what environmentalists want to make happen. One of their principal strategies is to choke the permitting process. Limiting funding will only further delay review of permits, not lift the burden of permitting from businesses and citizens.
This same straegy is being applied all across the country, as environmentalists are funding new, job-hungry, biologists, sending them into the field to find new species. They are purposely clogging the review process at the US Fish and Wildlife Service, submitting applications for review for listings of Threatened, or Endangered Species. Defunding the USFWS, or the EPA will alarm some chair-warmers, but is anticipated by the more radical actors.
You are miffed at people that consider themselves to be in pitched battle, with you. The monkey-wrenchers do not care about federal bureucrats' jobs and they have their own funding. They want the EPA and FWS defunded, for marketing purposes. Plus, they know that nobody can legally do anything without first grinding through federal review.
May '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
It's not just Obama and his administration. It's a long list of judges. It's the Congress that passed an unread 3,000+ page bill and then "deemed" a budget approved. Lawlessness might not be the status quo, but it didn't begin in 2008 and it won't end in 2012. We're facing a culture of corruption.
If Obama manages to get reelected, it will be worse the second time around.
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
Aaron Miller: It's not just Obama and his administration. It's a long list of judges. It's the Congress that passed an unread 3,000+ page bill and then "deemed" a budget approved. Lawlessness might not be the status quo, but it didn't begin in 2008 and it won't end in 2012. We're facing a culture of corruption.
If Obama manages to get reelected, it will be worse the second time around. · Feb 3 at 7:28pm
Exactly.
Oct '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
Bottom line... why would the House approve a debt ceiling increase or the Obama budget when the middle finger is what they will get as thanks. Shut it down. Or, let's just play dead and let the tyrant bury us.
Jul '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
This is where we find out if Boehner is the right man for that job.
CJRun: We have a government of men and face serious adversaries. Yes, they have ignored Feldman, but they have also ignored Hudson, and Vinson. They have also ignored the federal court and congress, with respect to the FCC having jurisdiction over the internet.
However, pay close attention to the weapons being used by the adversaries. There is no ban on deep water drillling, currently in effect. The new moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico is for the Eastern Gulf of Mexico, not the Central or Western, where the deep water drilling is done. The order from the Department of the Interior is to focus all permit and safety reviewing assets on the deep water permit applications, stopping them by review, not by moratorium. ...
Judge Feldman is, in my opinion, mistaken. He is missing what the Administration really did. ...
They took extraordinary measures in order to defy a federal judge and mask that defiance. Sounds like the contempt verdict will likely be upheld to me. The busier we make this Justice Department over the next two years, the better.
May '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
The Judiciary's power rests solely on tradition and respect. Ever since last year's disgraceful performance by the President at the State of the Union, we know that they receive none of that from the Executive.
So it's up to the Legislature to stand up for them. By means of its primary lever: money.
Paules is quite correct in calling this a Constitutional crisis if the Executive continues to ignore court orders.
May '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
I am at last convinced that the economic model followed by this administration is National Socialism. Private Industry is allowed to exist and even prosper as long as it does the govt.s bidding. If and when it does not, it is attacked and (if possible) destroyed.
Short term strategies to fight this are limited:
1. Legislature must use the CR to defund/shut down departments or programs that are creating the most harm.
2. Debt ceiling negotiations must further solidify #1 and be of short enough duration to absolutely ensure compliance.
3. The next budget must seriously limit funds available for further misdeeds - and throttle the most offensive depts.
I am not convinced that the GOP has the stomach for this fight. If they do not, we face ever more serious damage and time required to repair the damage. I do not yet depair but am not far from it.
Jun '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
A Government of Laws or Men? I daresay a substantial portion of the general public believes or even prefers the latter. They may or may not have been taught the former, but as Aaron suggested, what we often see has at least the appearance of being the latter, and it goes back much further than the current administration.
The success of the American experiment is predicated on being a Nation of Laws. If that changes, America becomes something else, and the slide toward oligarchy or worse begins.
What do you do when players in a game stop playing by the rules? What do you do when the umpires or referees or rules moderators stop enforcing the rules and rendering punishment? Our sensibilities are offended when someone refuses to comply with the rules - but can we get over our shock and surprise and move to restore accountability? And how do we do that - other than to hope that a majority still believes we should be a Nation of Laws, and not men?
The answers do not come readily.
May '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
Jim Chase:
What do you do when players in a game stop playing by the rules?
Exactly the right question.
The Tea Party movement is like the crowd at a football game yelling angrily at the referees. Either the refs, players and/or coaches start playing by the rules, or the game ceases to be legitimate and fans start abandoning it.
We tolerate bad judges and representatives like we tolerate bad refs. In either case, there's not much one can do from outside the system (as a fan or as a voter) but complain or leave. There doesn't seem to be much middle ground.
Another term by Obama would probably be enough to make many Americans lose all confidence that the system can be repaired.
But when I speak of a culture of corruption, I'm not referring only to politicians. How many voters, including conservatives, rejoiced when the federal government stepped in to regulate the volume of TV commercials? Generations of Americans have been raised to believe that government is where we should look for solutions to our shared problems. The problem of lawlessness stretches beyond Washington.
Jun '10
Re: A Government of Laws, or of Men?
The problems seems to be we are governed by men who are above the law. Laws apply to you and me. All to often they don't apply to those who govern us because they have exempted themselves, legally or otherwise. I'd suggest ending those exemptions as a way to a more responsible, more responsive, government.
If the government can't govern while following the law, then either the government or the law needs changing.