Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on power to issue executive order by us president
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Eligibility of Executive Orders The power of an executive order carries the same power as a federal law. An executive order is an order issued by the President that does not require the approval of Congress, the executive branch of the government, and Executive Orders same force of the law. Many question the decision of the Founding Fathers to grant the power to a President to issue an executive order. Much controversy erupted over the access a President has to issue an executive order. Due to the problem inherent to executive orders, Congress and the Judicial Branch takes action to limit these orders. In fact, these orders have been limited by the system of checks and balance and constitutional authorization. In the first place, the Judicial Branch applies and interprets the law. However, once the Judicial branch believes an executive order has exceeded its constitutional limits the branch will review the order and often halt the process limiting the power of the …show more content…
President. For example, on January 29, 2017 President Trump issued an executive order preventing refugees, migrants, and also green card holding persons from Muslim countries from entering the United States. Rapidly the Judicial Branch issued “temporary nationwide stay.” which prevented the government from removing immigrants detained at the airports, displaying the exercise of checks and balances (“The Judicial Branch Grabs Back”). While the Constitution gives this permission to a President there are significant restraints to the usage of this Presidential tool. For this reason, the 3 branches of government were created. The federal judiciary is granted the power by the constitution to ensure that the President's actions are legally authorized while Congress has the right to legislate and appropriate the orders of the President (Article III of The Constitution). The system of checks and balances challenges the ability of the President to issue executive orders. Due to the authorization by the Constitution to Congress, Congress has the power to create the laws that govern the people.
In Article I of The United States Constitution grants power to Congress to limit the power of the President to issue executive orders (“The Powers of congress”). For example, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 explicitly revoked a December 13, 1912, executive order that had created the Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 2. In 1992, Congress revoked an executive order issued by President George H.W. ordering to establish a fetal tissue bank for research (“Congress Legislation”). Since the Constitution empowers Congress to make laws the President cannot create a law without the permission of Congress. The right to overrule a Presidential order is also authorized in the Constitution. When and if Congress does not agree with an executive order members of Congress have the permission to veto the order. Limitations by Congress have limited the potential of an executive
order. Furthermore ,the Founding Fathers granted this power to the President simply for discretionary power. Discretionary power is not mandatory but permissive. These powers are granted to the President by the constitution but should only be exercised accordingly. The power of the President to issue an executive many startled many like Congress and the Judicial Branch; for this reason Congress and the branch began setting limitations discussed in the previous paragraphs. Of course, Presidents hold immense power with an executive order. The permission to use executive orders lies in the constitution. The Judicial Branch act accordingly to control the power of a President using checks and balances. Congress is empowered to make laws and before an executive order is passed congress has the power to overrule the order. Limitations have to be set in order to control the power of the President and the power of executive orders.
In both texts, "Response to Executive Order 9066” by Dwight Okita, and “Mericans” by Sandra Cisneros, I will compare and contrast how the authors develop this theme. The theme is that no culture should be judged on their looks. In "Response to Executive Order 9066", they specify out Japanese and in "Mericans", they specify out Mexicans.
Both stories, Response to Executive Order 9066 and "Mericans", establish a common American Identity theme. The main idea of these two stories is how people may or may not relate to their cultures. Both are narrated by teenage girls, and both establish a common theme that your appearance does not define you.
The United State’s Constitution, the shortest written Constitution in the world, only has twenty-seven amendments, and now it is time to add another. The power of a presidential line-item veto was denied to the Clinton Administration in 1998, but with this last Congress being the least productive Congress ever, it is time to re-think the power distribution in the legislative process. In Congress, on average, only 10% of the bills proposed make their way through, and ever reach the President’s desk. In this modern day and age a bill, on average, is 3,105 words. When Congress was first created the idea was that each proposed legislation would be contained in one bill, now bills are comprised of various provisions. Which is why the power of the line-item veto would be beneficial to expand presidential authority. This line-item veto authority is the ability to cross out certain provisions while still being able to sign in to law the entire bill. This would be beneficial to the United States government, as an amendment that would allow the president to cut out unnecessary spending to in turn lower the national deficit. The United States government needs to pass an amendment to allow Presidents to use the line item veto.
Presidential power has become a hot topic in the media the in recent years. There has been extensive debate about what a president should be able to do, especially without the involvement of Congress and the American people. While this debate has become more publicized since the Bush administration, similar issues of presidential power date back to Truman and the Korean War. As with much of the structure of the U.S. government, the powers of the president are constantly evolving with the times and the executives.
The Executive Branch can veto bills from the Legislative Branch, but the Legislative Branch can override the veto. An example of our checks and balance system is Obama’s plan for military action that requires congressional checks and balances; therefore, Congress has a constitutional duty to debate and vote on Obama’s plan to expand the US role in Iraq and Syria.
Judicial Branches basic job is to determine if laws or acts are unconstitutional. Subsequently, the U.S. Judicial branch checks both the Executive and Legislative branch through checks and balances. The judicial branch has the ability to rule presidential actions unconstitutional and has its judges serve for life. The Judicial Branch can also declare and interpret laws written by the Legislative Branch, and signed by the Executive Branch, unconstitutional. One example of the Judicial Branch checking the Executive Branch was in Late 2014 when the Judicial Branch declared Obama’s immigration acts unconstitutional. This allows the Judicial Branch to check the Executive Branch by allowing laws passed by the Executive Branch to be unconstitutional and not be
2. The judicial branch is known as the evaluators or interpreters. They interpret the meaning of laws and apply them to individual cases; they are the final decision if a law violates the U.S. Constitution (“Branches of Government”).
The Judiciary Branch offers checks and balances to the other branches of government. To both the Legislative and Executive branches, the Judicial Branch holds the power of judicial review. The Judicial branch can also declare existing laws as unconstitutional.
The War Powers Resolution was the result of a consistent and ongoing power struggle between the President and Congress in the United States. The Constitution of the United States lays out the powers of the different branches of government. These branches are specifically designed to check each other to create a balance of power. In regards to foreign security affairs, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that the Congress has the power to declare war, maintain the army and navy, and control war funding. Under article II, section 2 the President is the Commander and Chief of the Army and Navy. The President can also veto a declaration of war made by the Congress which must be overturned by a 3/4ths vote by the Congress. The Presidential veto power was also used to create a hurdle for the Legislative branch in passing this policy. However, as this essay will establish, the Congress was able to pass the bill despite the opposition from the Executive branch. The War Powers Resolution is a controversial piece of legislation because it challenged the power of the President as the Commander and Chief of the army and navy. This challenge was perpetrated by Congress in order to check this power of the President and strengthen the significance of the right to declare war.
It is obvious the president was not given enough power under the Constitution. This is in part because Article II of the Constitution was written in a short period of time with little thought. Many presidents have had to make unclear decisions with little information about the circumstance in the Constitution and the president is beginning to take over the government due to increasing implied powers. However the president’s power has recently proven that it has outgrown the constitution and is swiftly evolving. The Constitution gave the president broad but vague powers, including the authorization to appoint judges and other officials with the Senate’s consent, veto bills, lead the military as commander and chief and make sure “that the Laws be faithfully executed.” Many of these powers however are shared with the Legislative Branch, and cause conflict within the government.
The subject of signing statements has created much debate among the houses of Congress, government officials, and the public alike. These signing statements fall under the categories of constitutional and legislative history signing statements. Constitutional signing statements are those in which the president deems certain provisions of the legislation as unconstitutional, therefore they should not be enforced (Bradley & Posner, 2006). Legislative history signing statements are executive interpretations of ambiguous legislation (Bradley & Posner, 2006). The Constitution very specifically outlines the process of a bill being passed up to the executive level, but the issue of presidential signing statements is not explicitly discussed, therefore it becomes a controversial grey area; specifically when a President uses a signing statement to express partial support and intent to enforce a law. This essay will discuss signing statements and the role that they play in the legislative process. In addition, the legality of presidential signing statements in respect to the constitution will be argued through the exploration of the origins, past applications, and attempts at limiting such presidential implements.
The executive branch has the power to veto bills and laws passed by the Congress, and the executive branch sees the laws through. All the branches, however democratic, are set-up for the people and to carry out the public’s will. If any of the branches were unable to do so, the system would not have survived 200 years.
The Executive branch is all under the President's command, he is the one in charge of the final decisions. The Executive may veto the bill, all the hard work from the rest of the branches for the Executive to deny the bill. It also enforces laws which can be a major responsibility. It can also negotiate foreign treaties with other countries, in other words they inform and talk to other countries about what is happening. The President appoints the federal judge and this judge has his job for life or until he resigns.
The power of the Executive branch has expanded over time to become the most authoritative division of government. In contrast to the Constitution’s fundamental designer, James Madison, who predicted the Legislative branch would dominate due to it’s power in making laws and regulating taxes/spending, the executive powers have proven to be superior and ever broadening. Since the birth of the Republic, the President has sought to protect his rights and seek beyond his restriction of power. Setting the precedent as early as 1795, George Washington refused to relay documents relating to the Jay Treaty to the House of Representatives and saw his actions as a justified act of “executive prerogative.” Moreover, weaving throughout the Nineteenth century, presidents such as Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln conceived and added functions, such as the extensive use of the veto and the president’s direct and active role as Commander in Chief to their executive tool-belt.
One example is the Attorney General’s office was caught spying on reporters, threatening the freedom of the press. This does not necessarily mean that the judicial branch is not sufficiently separated from the executive and judicial branches, but due to the separation of powers, checks and balances can be applied in this situation. Because the judicial branch took actions that violate American citizens’ constitutional rights by threatening the freedom of the press, the executive and legislative branches have the power to prevent the judicial branch from taking such actions again. They have the power to protect the rights of the people, and to protect the abuse of power by one branch of