Why do so many leftists believe in the Executive Order?

[BackAgain]

That is possible. The search engine is not the best.

If it was, I am sure he will be happy to link us to some of those post to support his claim.

Why do so many leftists believe in the Executive Order?

So, what is an executive order? Related News “An executive order is the most formal of the three executive actions a president can take under Article II of the Constitution,” said Doug Gansler, former attorney general of Maryland. The second type is an executive memorandum: “For instance...

www.usmessageboard.com

Also see his subsequent post #15.

And he’s mostly correct. An EO must be linked to a grant of authority under a law passed by Congress. They don’t do the administrative shit. They authorize the Executive to formulate rules and procedures about the subject matter of the law — to put it into effect.

Absent such a law, an EO would merely be a fiat. And in our republic there ain’t no legal fiats.

Trump’s Bump Stock Ban Just Lost Big in Federal Court

“It is not the role of the executive—particularly the unelected administrative state—to dictate” the terms of criminal law, said the 6th Circuit.

reason.com

 

[pknopp]

Why do so many leftists believe in the Executive Order?

So, what is an executive order? Related News “An executive order is the most formal of the three executive actions a president can take under Article II of the Constitution,” said Doug Gansler, former attorney general of Maryland. The second type is an executive memorandum: “For instance...

www.usmessageboard.com

Also see his subsequent post #15.

And he’s mostly correct. An EO must be linked to a grant of authority under a law passed by Congress.

What grant of authority did Congress give Trump to ban bump stocks?

 

[jknowgood]

We don't know yet but you have completely avoided my argument.

If Trump can ban an aspect of the gun and have the Supreme Court allow that to stand, why is it Biden couldn't?

If it's bad for Biden to do, why was it not bad for Trump to do it?

Trump eliminated something that made the firearm more of an automatic. Which is against the law already.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Also see his subsequent post #15.

Thanks, now show one from him when Trump was POTUS as he claims.

And he’s mostly correct. An EO must be linked to a grant of authority under a law passed by Congress. They don’t do the administrative shit. They authorize the Executive to formulate rules and procedures about the subject matter of the law — to put it into effect.

I agree.


And as for Trump's EO....

https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2022-11-14/u-s-supreme-court-again-spurns-challenge-to-gun-bump-stock-ban

 

[BlackSand]

We don't know yet but you have completely avoided my argument.

If Trump can ban an aspect of the gun and have the Supreme Court allow that to stand, why is it Biden couldn't?

If it's bad for Biden to do, why was it not bad for Trump to do it?

.

It's important to remember that when someone wants to negotiate your Constitutionally Protected Rights ...
It doesn't matter who they are, or what party they represent, because the Founders left you the opportunity to shoot them in the face for trying ...

.​

 

[Dragonlady]

Biden making noise about banning guns with an EO, but we in this country seem too stupid to know that it would not effect the population, because a President can not change law on his own, and certainly can't change the Constitution...

In answer to the question posed in your thread title, the reason Democrats believe in the E0, is because Republicans refuse to legislate.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Trump eliminated something that made the firearm more of an automatic. Which is against the law already.

So, you support Trump's anti-gun EO.

 

[pknopp]

Trump eliminated something that made the firearm more of an automatic. Which is against the law already.

Semi automatic weapons make guns more of an automatic over single shot guns. But again, there you go defending the indefensible.

Trump did it so it's all good.

 

[Care4all]

Not good. E/Os should be reduced, but Rs and Trump are hypocrites re: this.

Obama vs. Trump Executive Orders - Politic Sphere​

During his 8 years as American first black president reign, Obama issued 276 executive orders, and during the 4 years he was in the presidential office, Trump actioned 220 executive orders . Before he became President, Trump despised his predecessor Obama for using executive orders in a bid to grab power and described them as “power grabs” and a “basic disaster.”

 

[jknowgood]

So, you support Trump's anti-gun EO.

Not really but explaining how he did it.

 

[jknowgood]

Semi automatic weapons make guns more of an automatic over single shot guns. But again, there you go defending the indefensible.

Trump did it so it's all good.

No actually I didn't agree with it. Just explaining how he did it.

 

[pknopp]

Not really but explaining how he did it.

And I explained how Biden can now take it a step further.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Not really but explaining how he did it.

If you say so.

Either way, now using it as precedent the Biden admin can use equally twisted logic to ban all sorts of things associated with guns.

 

[jknowgood]

And I explained how Biden can now take it a step further.

No he cannot do away with an amendment.

 

[BackAgain]

What grant of authority did Congress give Trump to ban bump stocks?

That’s why the 6th circuit initially scuttled his move.

if I am not too bleary eyed this morning, I understand the initial decision went to the 6th Circuit for a rehearing en banc. There, the z court allowed the EO to stand.

SCOTUS later denied the writ of certiorari which allowed the en banc ruling to stand.

However, the SCOTUS decision relied on a case which deferred judgment to the agency involved in making the administrative rule (here the President’s EO). It was the Chevron doctrine.

See Docket for 21-1215

So, the question is not whether there was a proper congressional authorization for such rule making. The question is whether the Chevron doctrine allowed for it in the matter of machine guns and bump stocks.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No actually I didn't agree with it.

Why did you not say so to start with?

No he cannot do away with an amendment.

He does not need to thanks to Trump's EO

 

[my2¢]

As long as EOs aren't ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court then whether I'm happy or sad with EOs is based on my opinion of their content.
Specifically concerning guns, I have no leanings one way nor the other.

 

[BackAgain]

If you say so.

Either way, now using it as precedent the Biden admin can use equally twisted logic to ban all sorts of things associated with guns.

That isn’t true unless the facts line up. There is some authority for rule making based on laws promulgated to create ATF and various federal laws concerning firearms. The question is what congressional law (if any) authorized Brandon to unilaterally dispense monies collected via taxation for college loan repayments?

 

[pknopp]

No he cannot do away with an amendment.

If Trump can ban as aspect of a weapon, so can Biden. Both simply made a gun fire faster.

 

[progressive hunter]

Trump banned Bump stocks with an EO.

that was an executive action not an executive order,, and it was wrong of him to do either way,,