President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
For those interested in the substance of what we do in legal scholarship, rather than professorial one-upsmanship, Robert Delahunty and I have published an academic paper criticizing President Obama's declaration in July that he would not enforce the immigration laws against 800,000-1.7 million young illegal aliens. We argue that there are cases where Presidents can decline to enforce a federal law, such as when a law is unconstitutional, infringes on presidential constitutional powers, or Congress fails to provide any resources. But Obama's declaration, we argue, violated the Constitution because Obama is refusing to enforce a law because he simply disagrees with the policy.
If that is possible, then President Romney could effectively kill Obamacare by refusing to enforce it, or lower the tax rate by only enforcing the tax laws at his preferred rates. Take a look at our argument here.
- Comment (12)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (6)
Comments:
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
Thank you articulating this important point with two clear examples of what the next president could do: 1. Refuse to enforce Obama-Care; and #2. Only enforce the tax rate up to a rate he prefers to carry out his economic policies, regardless of what congress desires.
The president's executive fiats are classic slippery slopes, but this president will have no trouble, with a straight face, claiming that #1. following the immigration laws of this nation (that he doesn't like so much), is unconstitutional. #2. The immigration laws of this nation (that he doesn't like much) infringes on his presidential powers to deal with foreign entry into our sovereign borders, and #3. Congress has not provided him the resources to deal with the massive problem that has become such a national pandemic, so he can't enforce.
On top of this the media will ignore it, or support him and his excuses. However, we really need scholarship like this to make the case for doing these exact things when this president is retired. Namely, to not enforce Obama-Care and unilaterally lower tax rates by executive order.
Feb '11
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
How then, is there any rule of law, when the executive can flout the law at a whim?
Jun '10
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
I'm pretty sure that noticing President Obama's disdain for the Constitution, or noticing anything that puts him in a bad light, is racist. Check with Chris Matthews, but I'm pretty sure that any personal criticism, of any kind, is racist.
Apr '12
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
And how can he get away with it? Is no one monitoring him? Can no one do anything about a rogue (as in "rogue elephant") President?
Apr '11
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
But, but he taught Constitutional Law....
This is just standing up to another of those negative rights...and lighting the fire of fundraising.
Jul '10
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
My problem with the headline is, which of endless indefensible breaches of duty?
Jul '10
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
One might sum up President Obama as someone who has chosen to do whatever he wants, with no regard to law or authority - except lead any reasonable political debate.
Oct '10
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
Professor Yoo:
Edited on September 13, 2012 at 7:22amGiven Obama's repeated violations of the constitution-illegal recess appointments, failing to enforce immigration laws, intervening to stop Boeing opening a factory and ignoring bankruptcy law with Chrysler bondholders, don't these all rise, individually or collectively, to the level of impeachable offenses? And if so, why hasn't Boehner moved to start the impeachment process?
Jul '12
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
Please answer TeamAmerica's question. I have asked my congressman, to his face, why no one is holding this president accountable. He mumbled something about voting him out in November. Tonight on Wilkow's show, he asked Sen. Mike Lee about impeachment and Lee muttered almost the exact same words about "votin' em out in November." What is going on in Congress? Why are they allowing this?
Jul '10
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
Because no one wants to impeach the first black president.
You can claim that it would take too long and you might as well just vote him out, but that's trying to find political cover for no political will.
Oct '10
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
Devereaux
Because no one wants to impeach the first black president.
They would if a black Republican had launched as many drone attacks as this black Leftist has. It's the combination of skin color and ideology which shields Obama, not just the former.
Don't forget, with a Democrat majority in the Upper House, a House impeachment will not result in Senate conviction. So it's perhaps reasonable for the House leadership to conclude that it's not worth burning the time and energy on the impeachment process. Maybe if the Republicans take back the Senate but Obama holds on to his job ... not a terribly likely scenario, but possible.
May '10
Re: President Obama's Indefensible Breach of Duty
Let's be honest. This historical embarassment SHOULD be impeached for violation Article II, Section 3:
This isn't an opinion, by his own admission, it's a fact. But it's never going to happen to THIS president with the kiss-up media driving the narrative.
...and the republic will be weaker because of it when some future president uses Obama's thumbing of his nose at the Constitution ...and got away with it. Heck, Rahm showed him the way ---->