Famed Liberal Law Prof Warns Of Constitutional Crisis From “Emperor Obama”

Obama’s Amnesty Threatens To Shut Constitution

 

 

 

 

 

 

” Pundits warn that a funding fight over the president’s move to grant de facto amnesty to illegal aliens threatens a politically risky government shutdown. But there’s something much more important at stake here.

  The Founders had good reason to give Congress the power of the purse: Short of impeachment, it’s the most effective way to stop a lawless president from disobeying the will of Congress and usurping powers not granted by the Constitution.

  The question is: Will Congress use this power to thwart President Obama’s shredding of the Constitution with his executive amnesty plan? “

 

 

Even some renowned liberals are recognizing the threat to our Constitution posed by “King Obama’s” unilateral action …

 

 

” There’s more at stake here than mere political fortunes. We are at the constitutional tipping point that Georgetown University law professor Jonathan Turley warned us about as Obama continues to wield executive authority that he himself once said he did not have.

  We live in a constitutional republic, and the president who says he cannot wait for the Congress to act ignores a Constitution that says he has to. Article I, Section 8 gives Congress exclusive authority to “establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization” and Article II, Section 3 says that it’s the president’s duty “to take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

  Professor Turley told the House Judiciary Committee at a Dec. 3 hearing that Obama’s abuse of executive power has grown to the point that “he’s becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid.” “

 

Read more at IBD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Ted Cruz And Glenn Beck Talk “Imperial Presidency”

Cruz: 4 Reasons Obama’s Use Of Executive Orders ‘Ought To Concern Everyone’

 

 

 

 

 

” “We are ruled by laws and not men. And no man is above the law — especially the President.”

  This was the theme of Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) conversation with Glenn Beck on The Blaze’s radio show Tuesday, and the same message Cruz has vocalized since the President’s State of the Union address one week ago.

“ If a president can pick and choose which laws to follow, he is no longer a president,” Cruz said. “And that is dangerous.” 

  In the 25-minute segment (listen in the Sound Cloud above) Cruz gives several reasons he’s frustrated with the Administration. Here’s four: “

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

 

Gun Control Through Executive Action Promised By Holder

Holder Confirms Obama Ready To Use Executive Order On Guns ‘In Absence Of Meaningful Action’ By Congress

 

 

” “And on the subject of the use of the president’s authority, my hope is – and I would argue that he take whatever action is possible, as he has done in a number of steps already and as you have done in trying to clarify the mental health issues that have to be reported to the NIC system, my hope is that additional measures, executive actions are contemplated under that authority,” Blumenthal continued.

“ The president – it is his intention to again try to work with Congress, but in the absence of meaningful action to explore all the possibilities and use all the powers that he has to, frankly, just protect the American people,” Holder replied.

  Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) asked Holder to explain the constitutional authority under which Obama has decided to grab his pen and paper in lieu of the legislative branch.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—

Obamacare “Fixes” Illegal … State Attorney Generals Say

Eleven State AGs Protest ObamaCare “Fixes” As “Flatly Illegal”

 

 

 

” Alternate headline: Hot Air readers get results! In our year-end poll, readers chose as the most underreported story of 2013 the lawlessness of the Obama administration in its handling of ObamaCare. Eleven state Attorneys General share that opinion — and started off the year attempting to correct it. Led by Patrick Morrisey of West Virginia (no relation), the consortium of AGs protested the changes in a letter to Kathleen Sebelius (via Instapundit):

 

The attorneys general specifically criticize President Obama’s executive action that allowed insurance companies to keep offering health plans that had been canceled for not meeting ObamaCare’s more rigorous standards.

We support allowing citizens to keep their health insurance coverage, but the only way to fix this problem-ridden law is to enact changes lawfully: through Congressional action,” the attorneys general wrote in a letter to Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “The illegal actions by this administration must stop.”

They say the healthcare fix was “flatly illegal under federal constitutional and statutory law.” “

—

What a Difference an Election Year Makes

Richard Fernandez

   “Although most of the discussion around President Obama’s latest move will probably center around his authority to enact by executive authority what was the subject of pending Congressional legislation, the most interesting aspect of his decision is what it reflects about the collapsing special interest coalition that supports his administration. On the face of things the decision is all about November 2012.

 

For years the administration had said it didn’t have the authority to make such a move, saying it couldn’t decide to stop deporting wide categories of people on its own without approval from Congress. But on Friday Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said she now interprets the law to give her this discretion.”

Where Do We Draw the Line ?

Professor Hanson on our imperial president :

 

 

   “Legally, President Obama has reiterated the principle that he can pick and choose which U.S. laws he wishes to enforce (see his decision to reverse the order of the Chrysler creditors, his decision not to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, and his administration’s contempt for national-security confidentiality and Senate and House subpoenas to the attorney general). If one individual can decide to exempt nearly a million residents from the law — when he most certainly could not get the law amended or repealed through proper legislative or judicial action — then what can he not do? Obama is turning out to be the most subversive chief executive in terms of eroding U.S. law since Richard Nixon.”

 

 

Scholar of Who’s Constitution ?

Can kangaroo courts and star chambers be far off ? The disdain of the left for the Constitution and the separation of powers is boundless .

“Controlling the politically insulated federal courts, especially the Supreme Court, has long been atop the left’s to-do list. Since it doesn’t own Chief Justice John Roberts,now the game is to shame him. ”

As the appeal of their empty promises becomes ever not obvious in the eyes of the voting public their increasingly strident  efforts to stave off the inevitable rendezvous with the “dustbin of history” forces them to resort to a slash and burn .

“President Obama took political meddling with the Supreme Court a step further when he stood before some of the justices assembled within the Capitol for his first State of the Union address.”

This entire effort must end badly for all concerned . The only way the Left can possibily not worry that the disgusting tactics that they now place so much faith in will not be used against them by some future administration of a different party is because they are now “all in” and expect to maintain the reins of power indefinitely .

“Last month, the president contended that if the high court ruled ObamaCare unconstitutional, i twould mean “an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and
passed law” — which is the Supreme Court’s duty of judicial review that it has “somehow”
carried out since Marbury v. Madison in 1803,and which the Warren Court did in landmark
liberal cases such as Brown v. Board of Education and Griswold v. Connecticut. ”

I become increasingly concerned that this administration has no intention of going quietly into that good night . Could our record two and a quarter centuries of peaceful succession