"ENFORCE THE LAWS"
:As chief executive, the president has the authority to enforce the laws of the country. He derives these powers from the phrase “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” in section 3 of Article II in the Constitution. The president has at his disposal the entire executive branch (almost 3 million workers) to help carry out the laws of the land."
Constitution, Article II.
Section 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
Section 2. The President shall be Commander in Chief
1801 Impeachment of Johnson: The ground upon which the impeachment of President JOHNSON was made to rest,-and the sole ground on which his conviction is demanded with such imperative emphasis, is that the President is bound to execute whatever laws Congress may enact,-and that he has no right to decide, for himself or for anybody else, whether they are constitutional or not. Mr. JOHNSON acted in alleged violation.
IS OBAMA VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAW?
The president's power execute the law covers
a: all federal laws, whether or not the president agrees with them.
b: only those federal laws the president supports.
c: only those laws that described or implied in the Constitution.
d: all the laws of foreign countries to which the U.S. sends aid.
a. is the correct answer
III. LEGITIMATE EXERCISE OF POWER
A. Executive Power
Executive or presidential power is tied to the word "execute," that is, the wielding of power under the rule of law in order to enforce the law. Three principles describe the nature or purpose of executive power. First, the executive has no power to promulgate rules or judge cases. In other words, executive power is not legislative or judicial power. It is not the power to make law or change law. Second, the executive power is primarily active, not passive. That is, the executive does not wait for someone to come and request enforcement of a law. This is contrasted to judicial power which is passive or responsive in nature. The judiciary has no power to seek out a case or controversy, but must wait for one to come to it. The executive, on the other hand, need not wait but may seize the initiative. Third, executive power involves a discretionary element. The executive has some lawful discretion concerning if, when, and how certain executive powers are to be employed.
Is the current President making law himself by not faithfully upholding the constitution where as a bill legally approved by Congress and legally signed into Law by contracting the power to enforce a law of the land?
YES, OBAMA IS VIOLATING THE LAW THROUGH SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT
But it is unlikely he will be called on it. He selectively chose to ignore the law because of his thinking it was not fair to punish those who came here through no fault of their own.
While a commendable idea, he has still blatantly broken the law - despite his having said last year
In this case he chose to try to pander a few more votes instead of demonstrating patience and leadership by deferring to Congress to provide a more comprehensive law
House of Representatives Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, called Obama's order a "breach of faith" that Smith said will have "horrible consequences" for unemployed Americans who are looking for jobs only to find that illegal immigrants will work for less money.
OBAMA, IN HIS OWN WORDS, "I DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY..."
Here’s a transcript of that clip, which is from a 2011 Univision town hall:
“With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order — that’s just not the case. Because there are laws on the books, that Congress has passed — and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know we’ve got three branches of government.
Congress passes the laws.
The Executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement the laws, and then the Judiciary has to interpret the laws.
There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system, that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”
IS THIS A FLIP-FLOP OR A "RE-LOOK" AND CLARICATION?
Well, we know how it will be couched.
AND, DO YOU BELIEVE THIS ONE?
Plouffe: Immigration ruling fully within Obama’s authority; decision not made for political reasons.
Many people will allow this potential misuse of power or violation of law, but does this start us on a "slippery slope"? Of course, the response is "that's ridiculous, don't be paranoid or exaggerate." Well... where do we draw the line?
Interesting comment: The trouble is, "the president isn't a benevolent dictator," so he shouldn't be signing executive orders that flout the law of the land, no matter how stupid that law is.
Under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, the president has the duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This provision was included to make sure that the president could not simply choose, as the British King had, to cancel legislation simply because he disagreed with it. President Obama cannot refuse to carry out a congressional statute simply because he thinks it advances the wrong policy. To do so violates the very core of his constitutional duties.
But prosecutorial discretion is not being used in good faith here: A president cannot claim discretion honestly to say that he will not enforce an entire law — especially where, as here, the executive branch is enforcing the rest of immigration law.
Imagine the precedent this claim would create.