THE
PRESIDENT’S ENUMERATED POWERS—RULEMAKNG BY EXECUTIVE AGENCIES & EXECUTIVE
ORDERS
NOTE BY KENAGA: I suspect the greatest percentage of voters who do
not like “Obama’s Government” feel that he is violating the laws established by
our founding fathers but may not know how completely he is perverting and
dumping our Constitution.
This is a concise but well-researched summary that I
urge everyone who reads it to also ponder
and study it and become dedicated to continually share it with
others. Knowledge is power.
I have a very
strong testimony that those who crafted this document were inspired from
above and like the Bible, those who changed it arrogantly feel they know better
than the Lord and will someday answer to the Him. He will judge them as not being
on his side. Those who seek power over others are serving Satan who is a mortal
enemy of all mankind for the same reason: he seeks to enslave men to make them
as miserable as he is. Those who are part of a corrupt government seek to
enslave others.
…While our new majority
will serve as your voice in the people’s House, we must remember it is the
president who sets the
agenda for our government. … [emphasis added]
I’d like Boehner to show
us where in the Constitution it says that the president sets the agenda for the
government.
But Boehner is not as
astute as Ezra Klein, and does not know that it is our Constitution
which sets the “agenda” for the federal government. The agenda the
Constitution sets restricts
the federal government to war, international relations & commerce; and
domestically, the establishment of an uniform commercial system: a monetary
system based on gold & silver, weights & measures, patents &
copyrights, a bankruptcy code, and mail delivery (Art. I, Sec. 8, cls.1-16).
1 And
because none of the House Republicans seem to know that our Constitution
sets the agenda, and don’t know that our Constitution also enumerates the powers
delegated to the President, they are allowing Obama to carry out his
“agenda” to transform our Country into a fascist dictatorship.
What are
the Enumerated Powers of the President?
The powers of the
President are “carefully limited” and precisely defined by our Constitution. In
Federalist Paper No. 71 (last para), Alexander
Hamilton asks, …what would be … feared from an elective magistrate of four
years’ duration, with the
confined authorities of a President of the United States?…[emphasis
added]
2 The answer to Hamilton’s question is this:
There would be nothing to fear if Presidents obeyed the Constitution. But they
don’t obey it because the
dolts in Congress don’t make them obey it!
Well, then! Here is the complete list of the President’s enumerated powers:
Art. I, Sec. 7, cls. 2
& 3, grants to the President the power to approve or veto Bills and
Resolutions passed by Congress.
Art. I, Sec. 9, next to
last clause, grants to the executive Branch – the Treasury Department – the
power to write checks pursuant to Appropriations made by law – i.e., by
Congress.
Art. II, Sec. 1, cl.1,
vests “executive Power” [see below] in the President.
Art. II, Sec. 1, last
clause, sets forth the
President’s Oath of Office – to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution
of the United States”.
Art. II, Sec. 2, cl.1: makes the President Commander in Chief of the
armed forces when they have been called by Congress into the actual service of
the United States.
3 Authorizes
the President to require the principal Officers in the executive Departments to
provide written Opinions upon the Duties of their Offices, grants the President
power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for offenses against the United States,
4 But he can not stop impeachments of any federal judge or federal
officer.
Article II, Sec. 2, cl. 2
grants to the President the power: to make Treaties – with the advice and
consent of the Senate.
5 To
nominate Ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls, federal judges, and
various other officers – with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Article II, Sec. 2, cl. 3
grants to the President the power to make recess appointments, which expire at
the end of Congress’ next session.
Art. II, Sec. 3:
Imposes the
duty on the President to periodically advise Congress on the State of the
Union, and authorizes the President to recommend to Congress such
measures as he deems wise.
Authorizes the
President, on extraordinary Occasions, to convene one or both houses of
Congress [e.g., when he asks Congress to declare War]; and if both
houses can not agree on when to adjourn, he is authorized to adjourn them to
such time as he deems proper.
Imposes the duty
upon the President to receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers.
Imposes the duty upon the President to
take care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and
Imposes the duty upon the President to
Commission all the Officers of the United States.
That’s it! Anything else the
President does is unlawful and a usurpation of powers not granted.
What is the
“executive Power”?
So! The granting of the
“executive Power” to the President is not a blank check giving him power to do
whatever he wants. The
“executive Power” is merely the power to put into effect – to implement – those
Acts of Congress which are within Congress’ enumerated powers. Thus, if Congress
establishes “an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (as authorized by Art. I, Sec.
8, cl. 4), it is the President’s duty to implement and enforce the law Congress
makes. The President is to carry out – to execute – Acts of Congress.
But note well: His Oath
of Office – to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution”, shows that the
President must use his independent judgment
Accordingly, when
Congress makes a “law” which is not authorized by the Constitution, it
…would not be the
supreme law of the land, but a usurpation of power not granted by the
Constitution”… Federalist
No. 33
(last two paras);
7 And
since the President’s Oath requires him to “preserve, protect and defend the
Constitution“, the President must refuse to enforce an unconstitutional “law”
made by Congress. Otherwise, he’d be in collusion with the legislative branch to usurp
power over The People.
8 So,
then! Acting as a check on Congress (and federal courts) by refusing to enforce
unconstitutional “laws” (and opinions), as well as the duty of entertaining
foreign dignitaries, are the only occasions where the President may act
alone. His prime responsibility is to do what Congress
tells him.
Article I,
Sec. 1 & The Unconstitutional Administrative Law State:
Now, you must learn of
“administrative law” – i.e., rulemaking by Executive Agencies.
9 Article
I, Sec.1, U.S. Constitution, says:
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a
Congress of the United States.
That little phrase is of immense importance. It means
what it says, that only Congress may make laws: laws are to be made only
by Representatives whom we can fire every two years, and by Senators whom we
can fire every six years.
But
in Joseph Postell’s “must read” paper, “Constitution in Decline“, he shows that during
the administration of the nefarious Woodrow Wilson, Congress began
delegating its lawmaking powers to agencies within the Executive Branch.
Since then, Congress passes an overall legislative scheme, and delegates the
details to be written by un-elected, un-accountable bureaucrats in the various
Executive Agencies. They write the “administrative rules” which
implement the Legislation. The result is the execrable Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), which is accepted, by the indoctrinated members of my
profession, as “law”. Go here to see the abominable
CFR. (Give time to load)
May the
President Lawfully Make “Executive Orders”?
The Guiding Principle is
this: The President has no authority to do ANYTHING apart from constitutional
authority or statutory authority (assuming the statute itself is
constitutional).
1.
So! Respecting those matters within his constitutional authority & duties,
and authority & duties imposed by constitutional statutes, the President
may make “orders” – call them “executive orders” if you like.
For example: It is the
President’s constitutional duty “to take care that the Laws be faithfully
executed”. Thus, he has the duty to enforce [constitutional] laws made
by Congress. How does he enforce the laws? Sometimes, by means of “orders”.
To
illustrate: Say Congress makes a law, as authorized by Art. I, Sec. 8, clause
6, making it a felony to counterfeit the Securities and current Coin of the
United States. If U.S. Attorneys are not prosecuting counterfeiters, the
President should “order” them to do it. Or fire them.
But
say Congress makes a law which purports to make possession of shotguns shorter
than 18 inches a crime. Since the President’s Oath requires him to “preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution”, he is obligated to “order” the U.S.
Attorney General and the U.S. Attorneys to refuse to prosecute anyone for
possession of sawed-off shotguns. Why? Because such a “law” is unconstitutional
as outside the scope of the legislative powers granted to Congress in Our
Constitution. It also violates the Second Amendment.
Clearly,
such an order to refuse prosecution falls within the President’s constitutional
duties (enforce the Constitution), and he is giving an order to
people within the Executive Branch. The President is the one who is charged
with carrying out the Acts of Congress – he has the “executive Power”. But
because of his Oath, he may not carry out unconstitutional “laws”. That
is one of the checks on Congress.
The
President may also properly make orders addressing housekeeping issues within
the Executive Branch: Dress codes, no smoking or drinking on the job, he
may encourage executive agencies to hire qualified handicapped people, and the
like. Just as if you have a business, you may make orders addressing such
matters.
So! Do you see? The
President may lawfully make orders to carry out his constitutionally imposed
powers and duties, and powers bestowed by statutes which are
constitutional; and he may address “housekeeping” issues within the Executive
Branch.
2.
But a President may not lawfully, by means of “orders”, exercise powers not
delegated to him by the Constitution or by (constitutional) Acts of Congress.
Yet Obama has issued
various executive orders which are unlawful because they are not authorized
by the Constitution or by (constitutional) Acts of Congress. Here are two
executive orders which are particularly pernicious because they undermine our
foundational Principle of “Federalism”, and have as their object the “improper
consolidation of the States into one … republic.”:
E.O. Establishing Council of Governors: The effect of this E.O.
is to erase the Independence and Sovereignty of the States and consolidate us
into a national system under the boot of the Executive Branch.
Joseph
Stalin couldn’t do better than this. These E.O.s are blatantly unconstitutional
as usurpations of powers not granted in The Constitution! So, Nullify them! (Click on the blue word, wait for
loading & read more details).
3.
Likewise, executive agencies may not, by means of “administrative
rulemaking”, usurp the powers of Congress. (Remember, because of Art. I, Sec.1,
all rulemaking by executive agencies
is unconstitutional)! (Remember!).
Here are several cases of
such unconstitutional rulemaking:
a)
When Congress refused to pass the DREAM ACT, which provided a path to citizenship for
certain categories of illegal aliens, ICE had no authority to implement it, in whole or in
part, by executive “memo”! Power over Rules of Naturalization (i.e., who
qualifies for citizenship and what are the procedures) is expressly granted to
Congress by Article I, Sec. 8, cl. 4, which grants to Congress
alone the Power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization”.
The President has no
constitutional power over immigration & naturalization except to enforce
the Acts of Congress respecting those subjects. Article II, Sec. 3,
which imposes upon the President the duty to “take care that the Laws be
faithfully executed”, requires the President to enforce such
constitutional Acts of Congress.
But if Congress refuses to make a law respecting
naturalization, a President who enacts it anyway, via “executive order”, or
“administrative regulation”, or “administrative memo” by his underlings in the
various and he should be removed from office for his usurpation.
b)
Congress recently did not pass three sinister and grotesquely unconstitutional
bills Obama wanted: “Card check“, “Cap and Trade“, and the Disclose Act. (Click on blue words) These bills are
unconstitutional as outside the scope of the legislative powers granted by our
Constitution to Congress. Nowhere does our Constitution give
Congress authority to make laws
about labor unions (“card check”), or to regulate carbon emissions – CO2, the stuff
humans and animals exhale, and plants & trees need for photosynthesis (“cap
and trade”), or requiring people with federal contracts to report their personal political activities to the
Executive Branch (“Disclose Act”)!
Since
Congress may not lawfully make laws on such subjects, no one can. Yet, Obama is
circumventing the Constitution and implementing these three failed &
unconstitutional bills by agency rulemaking or executive order!:
The National Labor
Relations Board, is implementing “card check” by agency regulation. Read this.
The Environmental
Protection Agency is implementing “cap and trade” by agency regulation. Read this.
And it appears that Obama
– in furtherance of his “agenda” to reward his supporters and punish
non-supporters – is considering signing an executive order to implement the
Disclose Act. Read this.
So! Let us sum this up: The President must always uphold our
Constitution. When Congress makes an unconstitutional law, the President must refuse to implement
it; and he may, by means of executive orders, instruct people in the Executive
Branch not to comply. E.g., if a President orders the U.S. Attorneys to decline
to prosecute persons for possession of sawed-off shotguns, he would be acting
lawfully because Congress has no authority to ban them. But the President is
violating the Constitution when he implements “card check” by agency
rules made by the NLRB; when he implements “cap & trade” by agency rules
made by the EPA; and the “Disclose Act” by executive order, because the
President and executive agencies (as well as Congress) do not have authority
over these objects; and further, no one in the Executive Branch has authority
to make “laws”!
What should
we do about illegal Executive Orders & Rules made by Executive Agencies?
A Congress filled with
he-men and she-women, instead of ignorant cowards, wusses, and wimps, would impeach Obama for his
usurpations in signing unconstitutional executive orders, and in circumventing
Congress by having executive agencies implement, by means of administrative
rules, legislation which Congress did not pass. In Federalist Paper No. 66 (2nd para), Hamilton
expressly states that impeachment is an essential check on a President
who encroaches on the powers of Congress; and in Federalist No. 77 (last para), points out that impeachment
is the remedy for “abuse of the executive authority”.
But
since the people in Congress are too ignorant and weak to rid us of the
abomination in the White House, the States and Counties must nullify unconstitutional
executive orders and administrative rules, or submit to slavery and the
destruction of our Constitutional Republic. Since State and County
officials have taken the Oath to support the U.S. Constitution (Art. VI, last
cl.), they are bound by Oath to refuse to submit to illegal executive
orders and illegal agency rules.
And of course, WE THE PEOPLE and our
businesses must also spit on such illegalities by the Executive Branch. Our
“creature” (Federalist No. 33, 5th para, Hamilton), has turned into
Frankenstein, and has lost all legitimacy. PH
Endnotes:
1 In Federalist No. 45 (9th para), James Madison, Father of Our
Constitution, says: The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the
federal government are few
and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments
are numerous and
indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external
objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last
the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the
several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of
affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the
internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. [boldface
added]
…the executive magistracy
is carefully limited; both in the extent and the duration of its power… (5th
para) [i.e., limited & enumerated powers and 4 year terms]
…the
executive power being restrained within a narrower compass [than that granted
to the legislative branch], and being more simple in its nature… (6th para)
In
Federalist No. 75 (3rd para), Hamilton says: …The essence of the legislative authority is
to enact laws, or, in other words, to prescribe rules for the regulation of the
society; while the execution of the laws, and the employment of the common
strength, either for this purpose or for the common defense, seem to comprise
all the functions of the executive magistrate… [boldface added]
In
Federalist No. 78 (6th para), Hamilton says: …The
Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community.
The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules … The
judiciary … has no influence over … the sword or the purse …and …must
ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm … for the efficacy of its
judgments. [boldface added].
Read the list of the President’s
enumerated powers! The President’s powers really are “confined” and “carefully
limited” to carrying out laws made by Congress and enforcing certain judicial
decisions, military defense (a power shared with Congress), appointing
officials (subject to Congress’ approval), and entertaining foreign
dignitaries. That’s it!
3 Only Congress has the power to declare war (Art. I,
Sec. 8, cl. 11)! See clauses 12-16 showing that Congress has the
power to determine the funding for the military, and to make the Rules for the
discipline & training of the military and the Militia.
4 Re “Offenses
against the United States”: I explain here the criminal laws Our Constitution permits
Congress to make. It’s a short list. Take note, you federal criminal defense
lawyers.
5 I explain the treaty making power of the United States in two
papers here:
6 During the Terri Schiavo case, Alan Keyes spoke on the radio about
the constitutional powers of the President. I seem to recall that Dr. Keyes
spoke of the President’s obligation to exercise his “independent judgment” as
to whether an act of Congress or a federal court opinion is constitutional.
Whatever he said, he opened my eyes, and enabled me to see the elegant
beauty of our Constitution.
7 Hamilton also says in Federalist No. 33 (6th para): …it will not follow…that acts
of …[the federal government] which are NOT PURSUANT to its constitutional
powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of … [the States],
will become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of
usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such… [T]he clause which
declares the supremacy of the laws of the Union [Art. VI, cl. 2]…EXPRESSLY
confines this supremacy to laws made PURSUANT TO THE CONSTITUTION … [caps are
Hamilton's, boldface mine]
8 Madison says in Federalist No. 44 (last para before 2.): …the success of
the usurpation [by Congress] will depend on the executive and judiciary
departments, which are to expound and give effect to the legislative acts;
… [boldface added]: The
President must not collude with the legislative or judicial branches to usurp
power over The People! He must honor his Oath!
9 Most of the existing “federal” executive agencies are
unconstitutional. They meddle in matters which are not the business of the
federal government, as power over the matters is not granted by our
Constitution to the federal government. Here are a few of the unconstitutional
federal agencies: the
Departments of Agriculture, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban
Development, Energy, Education, Transportation, and Homeland Security. Likewise
for the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Communications Commission,
the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Office of National Drug Control
Policy, the National Economic Council, the Small Business Administration, the
Council on Environmental Quality, etc., etc., etc.
10 Progressives have erased the concept of “federalism” from our minds. “Federalism”
refers to the form of our government & the division of powers
between the national government and the States. A “Federation” (which is
what our Constitution creates) is an alliance of independent States associated
together in a “confederation” with a national government to which is delegated
authority over the States in specifically defined areas ONLY (i.e.,
the enumerated powers granted to Congress by our Constitution). Those
enumerated powers are the only areas wherein the national government is to have
authority over the States. In all other matters, the States
have supremacy, are independent, and sovereign! Learn more
of “federalism” here and here.
Our Framers warned
against the consolidation of the sovereign States into one national sovereignty: In Federalist No. 32 (2nd para), Hamilton
writes:
An entire consolidation
of the States into one complete national sovereignty would imply an entire
subordination of the parts; and whatever powers might remain in them, would be
altogether dependent on the general will. But as the plan of the convention
[the Constitution] aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the
State governments would clearly retain all the rights of sovereignty which they
before had, and which were not, by that act, EXCLUSIVELY delegated to the
United States…. [caps are Hamilton's; boldface mine]
In Federalist No. 62 (5th para) says: … the equal vote allowed
to each State is at once a constitutional recognition of the portion of
sovereignty remaining in the individual States, and an instrument for
preserving that residuary sovereignty. So far the equality ought to be no less
acceptable to the large than to the small States; since they are not less solicitous
to guard, by every possible expedient, against an improper consolidation
of the States into one simple republic. [boldface mine]
And
in Federalist No. 39 (6th para), Madison says: “But it was not
sufficient,” say the adversaries of the proposed Constitution, “for the
convention to adhere to the republican form. They ought, with equal care, to
have preserved the FEDERAL form, which regards the Union as a CONFEDERACY of
sovereign states; instead of which, they have framed a NATIONAL government,
which regards the Union as a CONSOLIDATION of the States.” And it is asked by
what authority this bold and radical innovation was undertaken? The handle
which has been made of this objection requires that it should be examined with
some precision….[caps are Madison's]
Madison
then gives a brilliant exposition of the “national” and “federal” aspects of
Our Constitution. More
than any other Paper, No. 39 addresses the primary political problem of our
Time: The destruction of “federalism” by eradicating all vestiges of sovereign
& independent States.
We are a trusting People
easily lead astray. Make something sound “patriotic”, and we are all for it.
Since 1892, American public school children have been indoctrinated with the
statist Lie that ours is an indivisible national government. This was done by means of the
Pledge of Allegiance: “….one nation … indivisible…”. Is it any wonder that the
author of this nasty bit of poison, Francis Bellamy, was a socialist who worked with the National Education Association
to institute this statist indoctrination into the public schools? This pernicious pledge is why
you don’t know, and no one knows, that our Constitution created a “federation”
of sovereign & independent States, united only for the limited
purposes enumerated in the Constitution.
Russ
Kenaga courtesy brother Jim Barrus
