This new style? Let's call it Obamalaw.

  • Article
  • Updated: August 19, 2013 - 6:49 AM

Administration’s new style involves an end run around the Constitution.

  • 82
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
SwiftBoatAug. 18, 13 7:08 PM

He's The Secular Savior, so it's OK.

41
54
jbpaperAug. 18, 13 7:25 PM

As of about 7:25 PM, there is no author listed. Who wrote this?

58
10
pumiceAug. 18, 13 7:29 PM

So cute, whichever-Republican-apologist-who-wrote-this commentary, to try to beat those who would offer a contrary opinion to the punch by pre-emptively taking signing statements out of the discussion. ("Presidents are arguably permitted to refuse to enforce laws they consider unconstitutional (the basis for so many of George W. Bush’s so-called signing statements).") Executive orders, administrative delay and Executive interpretation of Congress's intent through signing statements have been part of the political process for decades. For example, we are all aware that Executive Orders which completely reverse policies of the previous administration are routinely issued when a President of the other Party takes office. The modern history of the Presidency shows that EOs are very common: Teddy Roosevelt issued 1081 EOs; Taft, 724; Wilson, 1803; Harding, 522; Coolidge, 1203; Hoover, 968; FDR, 3522; Truman, 907; Eisenhower, 484; JFK, 214; LBJ, 325; Nixon, 346; Ford, 169; Carter, 320; Reagan, 381; Bush 41, 166; Clinton, 364; Bush 43, 291 and--in last place to date--Obama, 157.

Judging by your pre-emptive dismissal of Signing Statements, are we to assume that President Obama, unlike Bush 43, has issued none which ignore or totally subvert the intent of Congress?

64
36
spicebearAug. 18, 13 7:29 PM

Every President in recent memory has dodged around Constitutional requirements and much of what the author gripes about mirrors actions by previous inhabitants of the White House from both parties. If the current occupant seems to be doing more fancy running than usual, it may be due to an AWOL Congress... Perhaps if Congress could get off its collective tookus and actually DO something??

69
30
kebu80Aug. 18, 13 7:36 PM

Excellent article/opinion! A must read for all Minnesotans, especially liberals. This is why we call him King Obama. He thinks he rules the land. Him and his Chicago style political mafia. Not good!

51
78
pumiceAug. 18, 13 7:40 PM

Re: "Who wrote this?" The first paragraph's attributed to Charles Krauthammer. Coupla points regarding the first paragraph ("As a reaction to the crack epidemic of the 1980s, many federal drug laws carry strict mandatory sentences. This has stirred unease in Congress and sparked a bipartisan effort to revise and relax some of the more draconian laws."): (1) What's the mandatory sentence for powder cocaine? for crack cocaine? (2) Which Members of Congress have expressed unease about mandatory minimum sentences (and/or three strikes laws and/or truth-in-sentencing laws which remove the parole option)? (3) When was the bipartisan effort to revise and relax the draconian laws which have resulted in mass incarceration in the US "sparked"? (4) How far has that "spark" progressed? (5) How far is the "spark" expected to progress in this do-nothing Congress?

48
24
hawkeye56379Aug. 18, 13 7:41 PM

Prosecutors have ALWAYS had discretion in charging crimes. Whoever wrote this operates under the assumption that they should always charge the maximum possible. Why is that? They are supposed to do what justice demands. If nothing else, they can just plea bargain down to whatever result is fair. The idea that this is a violation of the law is naive.

54
24
SwiftBoatAug. 18, 13 8:00 PM

Yah, who wrote this? Someone from the Ministry of Truth.

39
46
jbpaperAug. 18, 13 8:09 PM

hawkeye56379; Prosecutors having discretion is one thing, having the Attorney General tell them not to charge someone with a crime that has a mandatory prison sentence is different. A prosecutor is looking at each case individually, not a broad range of cases.

35
38
badcopperAug. 18, 13 8:13 PM

Obama claimed in 2008 that he wold fundamentally change the US. He was right. At least his signature piece of legislation is increasingly being rejected by democrats and unions. He will forever be remembered by the coming cluster entitled ACA. It will be beautiful reminding future generations who voted for the mess, obama's legacy.

41
60

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT