Certainly the line where executive power starts and legislative mandate ends has never been explored to the extent we're seeing now. "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America" versus the various laws passed by Congress regarding these semi-autonomous departments with otherwise unchecked powers. We'll have to see how it plays out
> They've recently answered that. YES. They think he can break the law.
No, they said in certain cases, if he breaks the law, the available remedies for that lawbreaking do not include post-Presidential criminal prosecution.
The optimist in me wants to believe separation of powers will be maintained.
The realist in me asks what evidence anyone can offer for optimism here. Lower courts? Fine. It's going to the top and they've walked off positions held over decades, models of jurisprudence, even their own past voting records "for the win"
10 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 34.6 ms ] threadCould they just ignore the courts?
This administration seems happy to fire people at will? Would a department be able to follow the law if the staff’s jobs are threatened?
They've recently answered that. YES. They think he can break the law.
> Could they just ignore the courts?
YES. The only thing they can't ignore are the laws of physics.
No, they said in certain cases, if he breaks the law, the available remedies for that lawbreaking do not include post-Presidential criminal prosecution.
The realist in me asks what evidence anyone can offer for optimism here. Lower courts? Fine. It's going to the top and they've walked off positions held over decades, models of jurisprudence, even their own past voting records "for the win"
RBG should have retired earlier.