Althouse: "The Obama administration is adamant that the president is acting within his powers to implement laws already passed by Congress..."

November 20, 2014

"The Obama administration is adamant that the president is acting within his powers to implement laws already passed by Congress..."

"... and to prioritize resources but officials won't reveal the legal reasoning until tonight's speech. Other Obama supporters were reluctant to speak publicly about the potential legal arguments ahead of the address."

57 comments:

Mark said...: If this is the worst thing Obama does to prove that he's still relevant then I'm okay with it. The next Congress will have the tools to prune it back and after the kicking it got in November the Democratic Party may actually behave like it wants a chance in 2016.

Still, the next two years worry me greatly.; 11/20/14, 8:14 AM
PB said...: He must have been a pretty bad constitutional lawyer if he only found these powers just now...; 11/20/14, 8:15 AM
George M. Spencer said...: There's a parallel between the simultaneous and utter destruction of both Cosby and Obama this week.

Both men have destroyed themselves, and only one gets to destroy our Constitution.

The problem is that the great majority of Americans can't even begin to consider the possibility that the person they elected despises our system of government. Worse, he despises the great majority of Americans, too. We, the People, got drugged.; 11/20/14, 8:19 AM
wendybar said...: He is a fraud. Dicktator is the nicest term I can think of.; 11/20/14, 8:20 AM
Clayton Hennesey said...: This really is day one of the Age of Tribalism, isn't it? Who will have the strongest clan chieftain? After the knife, who will bring the gun? And after the gun, who will poison the watershed itself?

What this really reveals is a shockingly large number of people far more ready and eager for a generalissimo than for a constitutional republic with a legislative branch and an executive tasked with implementing the decisions of that board of directors.

This is how Third World and failed states are born: by the yearnings of the population itself for a strong man, a king, a patron.

Kings did not dominate most of human political history by accident or ignorance. They are the preference of the lazy and sluggish majority.; 11/20/14, 8:23 AM
Paul said...: Just sue him, sue him, sue him.

Defund him defund him, defund him.

And if the Gruber-in-chief keeps it up, then later IMPEACH HIM.

Keep in mind 10 or so Democrat Senators voted FOR the Keystone Pipeline System, despite Obama's threatened Veto.

The Dems, if threatened with destruction by Obama, can turn on him.; 11/20/14, 8:25 AM
Original Mike said...: "Still, the next two years worry me greatly."

We have a bomb thrower as President. Not good.; 11/20/14, 8:26 AM
wendybar said...: Isn't it great that he is going to do this Amnesty thing tonight, and tomorrow supposedly the Ferguson verdict is going to come in?? Doesn't it seem like the perfect time to get the rest of America pissed off?? This president is definitely trying to bring down America, and if you don't see it, you are blind or your head is buried someplace else.; 11/20/14, 8:28 AM
MayBee said...: Urg. This whole thing is frustrating.

CNN has been presenting it as, "Republicans say he doesn't have the authority to do this." and
"If Congress really wanted a say, they had time to do something"

As if "Doing something" is a default, and "not doing something" is an inaction rather than an action in itself.

Finally, Chris Cuomo said today, "These families (illegal immigrants) are left hanging". As if they've played no part in creating their own problem!; 11/20/14, 8:32 AM
traditionalguy said...: It is like watching The War of the Worlds as the invading Mars Machines begin to move over the earth. Obama is signaling their movement to start with the invasion of the USA by illiterate peasants.

The US Government is at war with the USA. Tonight is the Declaration of War.; 11/20/14, 8:32 AM
William said...: I Ithink of his remarks about crossing a line and, then, his later obfuscations of those remarks. Now this 180 on immigration.......There have been presidents in the past who have told whoppers: "Read my lips," "I did not have sexual relations," but I can't think of any President who has been more blatant about it, and a media that has been more supportive of the bullshit.; 11/20/14, 8:38 AM
Hagar said...: The legal arguments make about as much sense as they did whether waterboarding was "torture." Of course it is.

Practically Obama's action will not have much effect since these people never would be deported anyway, but the long term effects will be bad, I think.
It will be very hard to get any comprehensive reform legislation through Congress in the foreseeable future with the battle lines drawn as they are and set in concrete. The people involved will be "pardoned*" with an asterisk, and the prospects for eventual citizenship kicked a good bit farther down the road if not to oblivion. And they will be subject to the uncertainty of random interpretations of the "Executive Order" until the problem is resolved by proper legislation or becomes moot by their getting old and dying off. That is for those here at present. With no or uncertain control of the borders, more illegal aliens keep coming, and what about them?

This "Executive Action" by Obama will just add to the confusion and cynicism, and will have a bad effect for our observance and execution of "laws" in general - for both the governed and the governing.; 11/20/14, 8:39 AM
MayBee said...: With no or uncertain control of the borders, more illegal aliens keep coming, and what about them?

What happened to the kids at the border crisis of the summer? It seems to have been "solved" by ISIS beheading Americans.

What I thought we had learned from that crisis was that word of amnesty drew illegal immigrants here. As you indicate, this doesn't solve any problem and just creates them.; 11/20/14, 8:46 AM
chickelit said...: The revolution will be televised.; 11/20/14, 8:48 AM
garage mahal said...: Whites are gonna riot!; 11/20/14, 8:58 AM
The Drill SGT said...: Hagar said...
Practically Obama's action will not have much effect since these people never would be deported anyway, but the long term effects will be bad, I think.

I think you are wrong. These actions create the implicit promise of more amnesties and a vacuum that sucks more illegals into the country awaiting the next Executive Order...; 11/20/14, 9:02 AM
kcom said...: "We, the People, got drugged."

To put it in a more topical fashion, we got falling down drunk in 2008 and went up to the frat boy's bedroom. We're not sure exactly what happened but we went up there again in 2012. Now, we're finally realizing that maybe we were raped.; 11/20/14, 9:05 AM
Brando said...: The public generally opposes the president doing this on his own, but also generally favors some form of comprehensive action on immigration. The smartest move would be for the GOP to rollout its own proposal, one that the party can get behind, and then Obama's argument that executive action was the only way he could get this done completely unravels for the claptrap it is.

The key here is the PR war. Otherwise, any defunding, lawsuit, or impeachment is going to be played off as some partisan overreach, and it'll be 1999 all over again (which I don't think helped or hurt Gore all that much, but Clinton's approvals went up while the GOP floundered).; 11/20/14, 9:10 AM
Anonymous said...: MayBee: What I thought we had learned from that crisis was that word of amnesty drew illegal immigrants here.

That should have sunk in nigh onto 30 years ago, after the 1986 amnesty. But it didn't, and now I doubt there's really any way to halt the accelerating decline into tribalized banana republic. Time to get realistic and look out for Number One (i.e., my own children and grandchildren).

Hope all the illegal immigration enthusiasts are happy with the society that's left after all the nice law-abiding people get tired of being played for suckers and join the hustle.; 11/20/14, 9:10 AM
garage mahal said...: Only true believer idiots like The Madison Doughboy support gutting the constitution in favor of a bunch of criminals.

Eww nice burn. Tell us more about the constitution and this executive order, legal scholar.; 11/20/14, 9:17 AM
chickelit said...: garage mahal wrote Eww nice burn. Tell us more about the constitution and this executive order, legal scholar.

I'd rather hear your opinion(s) on how Walker can oppose unilateral diktats from Washington.; 11/20/14, 9:20 AM
HoodlumDoodlum said...: Chip chip chip away at the underpinnings of the concept of rule of law and the consent of the governed--what's the worst that could happen?
On this particular issue, of course, it's less about the actual prosecutorial discretion the Obama administration wants to use (it's not like they've been rounding these folks up in large numbers for the last few years anyway) so we're not talking about some sort of principled stand here, which actually makes it much worse.; 11/20/14, 9:28 AM
Hagar said...: Drill Sgt.,
The executive order will not have much immediate effect because it does not change anything; we will continue to drift as we are and have been.
This is all for show; styrofoam columns all the way down.; 11/20/14, 9:29 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: I predict the public reaction will be very very negative and Obama's approval numbers will dip below 35%.; 11/20/14, 9:43 AM
Anonymous said...: AJ Lynch said, "I predict the public reaction will be very very negative and Obama's approval numbers will dip below 35%."

*************

As the chaos he is unleashing engulfs us all, I expect Benito Obama's approval numbers will fall toward ZERO, followed by an event history will commemorate as "The Great Defenestration of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue."; 11/20/14, 9:52 AM
rhhardin said...: He's not acting within his powers if Congress removes him from office.

As it should.

The republicans care less for the constitution than for favorable media spin, though.; 11/20/14, 9:55 AM
Big Mike said...: Today's column by Ruth Marcus apparently outlines the administration's legal rationale. But even she, hard-core Democrat, expresses concern over Obama's actions.; 11/20/14, 9:56 AM
rehajm said...: chickelit said...
The revolution will be televised.

Only on cable. Not on the networks.; 11/20/14, 9:58 AM
Original Mike said...: "The republicans care less for the constitution than for favorable media spin, though."

They don't have the votes. It's that simple.; 11/20/14, 10:01 AM
Michael The Magnificent said...: Rule by diktat. And you, a law professor, must be so proud!; 11/20/14, 10:03 AM
Unknown said...: I've been hearing how other presidents did exactly the same thing, didn't actually remember & so bought it thinking "So they were they dumb then, and he is dumb now."

Forgot (I was alive at the time) that the previous actions were based on implementing law: worth repeating that Congress allowed amnesty for some illegals, and did not consider families -- so a father might be allowed to stay, but not his wife or children. The Presidential action was (in one case in direct opposition to the concept of republican meanness) action to prevent bad consequences of a poorly fabricated law. It (presumably) met the goals of the law, unless Congress intended to split families. It was an executive carrying out the wishes of the Biard of Directors.; 11/20/14, 10:04 AM
Unknown said...: Board.; 11/20/14, 10:04 AM
MayBee said...: I don't agree with Hagar that this is styrofoam-column like.

Those were for show, but they didn't set any kind of precedent. This is doing specifically to say "Screw you" to Congress and to garner votes from one group, and done without enough push back, it can become normal behavior soon enough.; 11/20/14, 10:21 AM
CWJ said...: Come on. What else are they going to say? It doesn't matter whether or not it stands up to scrutiny. The administration and its allies just have to stay on message. (In that regard, I can understand Althouse's fascination with Gruber as outlier.)

The maddening thing is that the press who should be greeting both the timing and substance of this justification with skepticism aren't in fact doing so. They are the ones with whom I am angry. But such is SOP in the age of Obama.; 11/20/14, 10:52 AM
David said...: Is this not a case where Turley could seek immediate injunctive relief? Surely an allegation of "irreparable harm" could be made and at least get this before a court now instead of waiting two years to make some legal precedent that would never apply because no future president would engage in this type action.; 11/20/14, 10:53 AM
Hagar said...: If there is anything to be enforced in this Executive Order, they won't enforce that either.

These people do not understand that wreaking havoc on the national system of laws is not the same as messing with Chicago City Hall.; 11/20/14, 10:59 AM
gerry said...: Wait and see what Obama outlines what he wants to do.

I'm wondering if he is capable of telling the truth, however, so what he says he will do may not be what he will do.

He has made life obnoxious because of his political philosophy's inability to be applied without using duplicity as a necessary part of the scheme.

Obama is really a piece of dirty work.; 11/20/14, 11:03 AM
Hagar said...: Damage is already done, even if we were now told that, on second thought, he will not issue any such executive order at all.

In South Chicago, "the base" may understand that it all is just about "Alinskying" City Hall, but that is not necessarily how it plays around the country; particularly among those who have higher expectations of their government.

Surely there will be a time when a 180 degree turn in Obama's policy rhetoric will be one too many?; 11/20/14, 11:24 AM
Anonymous said...: MayBee: I don't agree with Hagar that this is styrofoam-column like.

...This is doing specifically to say "Screw you" to Congress and to garner votes from one group...

No, "it" is being done with Congress to say "screw you" to Americans, and to keep the big dog open-borders donors happy.

...and done without enough push back, it can become normal behavior soon enough.

The whole set-up (flipping the bird at enforcement of immigration law) has been normal behavior for several decades now, it's just that the perps have gotten more and more shameless and in-your-face about it. Which is pretty normal behavior, really. People who gingerly "test the limits" of law-breaking and corruption, and get no punishment, push a little harder.

When they discover precious little push back in this next stage (nothing that can't be stamped down by a little judicial action - see e.g. Prop 187), they will naturally find the confidence to go full speed ahead on the project, though they will still prudently enlist "respectable" MSM and academic puppets to pump out supportive propaganda.

Having succeeded wonderfully in a very short space of a few decades, it's only human nature that they proceed to the mature stage of ignoring the law, in which untempered arrogance and the joys of face-stamping feature prominently.

That's where we are now.; 11/20/14, 11:26 AM
Hagar said...: I think I faintly remember Haldemann or Ehrlichmann being severely pilloried in the press (NYT/WaPo) for saying: "That statement is no longer operative."; 11/20/14, 11:31 AM
Hagar said...: Good times, good times!; 11/20/14, 12:03 PM
Anonymous said...: A few thoughts.

1) Some think the executive order won't have much effect because it will simply continue what has already been. To this I say, look closer. Having been in Immigration for 18 years now, I've seen quite clearly how this works. If President Obama offers an executive style of Amnesty for millions of people, what you'll have is a flood over the border. You'll have a new business plan on Friday. That business plan will be providing new illegals with receipts, going back 5 years, showing they paid cable bills, electric bills, water bills, sewer bills, etc, to show to the Department of Homeland Security that, yes, they did live here for the past 5 plus years, give me my amnesty!

This will be a booming business. And it won't matter that the fraud is easily discovered. Because Citizenship and Immigration Services is already swamped with work and encouraged not too look too closely at applications. What happens when you increase their work load 3 or 4 times over? Yeah, not more scrutiny, but less.

So, to those who think there won't be much effect, I say you're wrong.

2) The justification you're going to hear tonight is a very popular Democrat justification. Point at a Republican and shout, "They did it too!" For some reason, this always seems to work on the low information voter. Will it work this time? I suppose it depends. Is it true? In this case, no, it's not. The Reagan and Bush I amnesty was passed by Congress. They were attempting, as is the job of the executive, to actually implement the law the Congress had passed. It was reasonable for them to look at the law passed by Congress and ask, "Did they mean to include the children as well?" The reason we heard no outcry then was twofold. One, because we didn't know the disastrous consequences of amnesty back then and two, because everyone thought that was a perfectly reasonable way to implement a bipartisan law passed by congress.

Even though it's weak sauce, still, what else does this administration have to hang it's hat on? Therefore, they will go to old faithful and say, "Look, they did it too! Mommy!"

3) This is going to backfire. Badly. This is my prediction. I realize that Angleyne is very pessimistic about this. I have a different take altogether. This is too much too fast and it'll energize Americans, the left and right alike, and the pushback will be enough to kickstart a new movement in this country, similar to the tea party.

Ultimately, this will give us a Republican President (And likely a conservative one, not another Romney or McCain) in 2016, and that means more conservative Supreme Court Justices.

Obama may inadvertently be the best President Conservatives ever had.; 11/20/14, 12:43 PM
Lnelson said...: Comment from Trey Gowdy. When asked if impeachment would be appropriate, his response was "Have you met Joe Biden?"; 11/20/14, 1:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Not to worry, I'm sure the law professors, DAs, lawyers, and law enforcement professionals will unify and come out forcefully against this lawless behavior in ...; 11/20/14, 1:15 PM
Hagar said...: Actually his comment was in response to a question whether he was in favor of impeachment, and his answer was: "No, I have met Joe Biden!"; 11/20/14, 2:16 PM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: The DMV in California is opening a half-dozen NEW offices to process the 1 million illegals they expect to provide driver licenses to. When was the last time my state opened a new office for the convenience of its citizens, I wonder?

Here's the New Math:

Obama's Executive Amnesty + Motor Voter Law = 1 million more votes for Democrats.

As if California needed that. But worry not, my friends, as Cali goes so goes the nation...eventually.; 11/20/14, 2:34 PM
Hagar said...: He cannot give them citizenship, so they will not be able to vote more than what they already (illegally) do.

Above I only said this Executive Order will not have much immediate effect for those it ostensibly is supposed to help.
What other troubles it may cause - well, he will have to pass it, so that we can find out!; 11/20/14, 3:06 PM
Brando said...: "This is going to backfire. Badly. This is my prediction. I realize that Angleyne is very pessimistic about this. I have a different take altogether. This is too much too fast and it'll energize Americans, the left and right alike, and the pushback will be enough to kickstart a new movement in this country, similar to the tea party."

It very well might--most moderates don't like the idea of unilateral executive action, even if they favor the substantive policy. If the GOP focuses on that and plays this smartly--not overplaying their hand, and working this in the media--the public outcry will be enough to get some Dems to turn on him (after all, most of them have to face voters again). Even the Washington Post and other left-leaning or moderate publications are against the Prez on this.

I think what he's really hoping to get out of this is goading the GOP into an overreaction that will turn off the middle, bump his own approvals over 50, and get his party ready for a big 2016 comeback. He could get that if this isn't handled well by the GOP.

If I were an adviser to the GOP though, I'd strongly suggest getting their own, different immigration bill moving--nothing undercuts Obama's argument that "they were doing nothing!" more than a GOP bill taking shape, and instead it would expose his strategy to be "do exactly what I want the way I want it, or I'll just use my pen anyway".; 11/20/14, 3:07 PM
mccullough said...: This is what you get when you start a country in a place that has land borders with other countries.

The Japanese did a much better job picking a locale.; 11/20/14, 3:56 PM
Shootist said...: garage mahal said...
Whites are gonna riot!

Oh hell no, white's are going to stop payment on their payroll taxes.; 11/20/14, 3:59 PM
jr565 said...: Can those who paid money to go through the process to legally become citizens sue to get their money back?; 11/20/14, 9:40 PM
gk1 said...: I guess Obama's trying to see if he can get approval numbers lower than Bush's. Be my guest. The republican's can easily turn this into their advantage if they can avoid over reaching and wasting time with theatrics.It should be easy at this point, anything bill they pass will look more reasonable than this bone headed move.; 11/20/14, 11:08 PM
Drago said...: garage mahal: "Whites are gonna riot!"

Of course, this comment is funny because it's so not true!

Whites are far too busy stealing all of Cracks money.; 11/20/14, 11:14 PM
MeatPopscicle1234 said...: I think you're all missing the point. Everything that Obama does from here on out will be to cause as much damage as possible. He doesn't care about a legacy. Hell, I'm not even sure if he cares about making across the "finish" line, as long as he can blow a big-enough hole through the hull of the ship before the whole thing goes tits up. Obama is in full-on psychotic meltdown mode and all he cares about is finishing what he started before anyone has the guts to finally bring out the torches and pitchforks.; 11/20/14, 11:30 PM
Drago said...: Joshua Barker: "Obama is in full-on psychotic meltdown mode and all he cares about is finishing what he started before anyone has the guts to finally bring out the torches and pitchforks."

He knows he has nothing left to lose (personally) thus, it's Cloward-Piven 24/7 from this point on.; 11/20/14, 11:37 PM
Zach said...: It has to be some kind of standing argument, right? All of these "we can blithely ignore the text and the spirit of the law" arguments ultimately have some asterisk leading to a hypertechnical 37 paragraph argument for why the Court isn't allowed to have any oversight.; 11/20/14, 11:54 PM
Zach said...: Incidentally, is "prosecutorial discretion" really a fixed privilege under the law?

I mean, prosecutors have a certain amount of power by default, but do they really have a formal, written-down power not to enforce the law?

How about somebody who is *analogous* to a prosecutor? Is that written down anywhere? Obama doesn't argue in front of any courts personally, and he submits his own budget requests to Congress every year. Does he really get to argue that lack of resources gives him discretion to disregard the law?; 11/20/14, 11:58 PM