Royal Proclamations
The colonists were subject to the royal proclamations issued by King George III and when our founders drafted the Constitution, they granted 100% of the legislative power to Congress. In order to prevent the abuse of power by our chief executive they wanted to limit his power. The role of the President was to enforce the laws passed by Congress.
The King had the power to wage wars at his individual discretion and the states did not want our President to be able drag us into a war without the consent of the states and the people.
The power to issue Executive Orders may be necessary during a national emergency, rebellion or insurrection, but the President does not have the authority to issue executive orders that effect the lives of those who are not employees of the federal government.
For an Executive Order to go into effect, I believe it should be confirmed by two thirds of both the House and the Senate. What do you think?
Replies
My understanding is that the only power the President has in the use of Executive Orders, is to write/issue them only to assist in the execution of existing law that has been written and passed by Congress.
His order to limit illegal migration was legal based on existing immigration law. He has the authority to limit any group, from any country, for any reason, for any length of time. Period. No one has any say over his existing authority.
If, as you ask, that E.O, was then only a directive subject to the approval of 2/3 of Congress, then it seems to me, that that would be a choke-hold on the protection of America's borders.
So, what SHOULD have happened when he did issue that legal E.O. was this:
President Trump should have had a national press conference, so all of America could watch and listen for themselves.
He then, should have recited Article III, proving the limitation of the courts as nothing in Article III mentions jurisdiction over immigration. Immigration law pertains only to the Legislative and the Executive branch. Congress actually gave some of their authority in that law to the President.
He then, should have read 1952 Immigration law (which he did do, but not in context of the Article III—that is where he went wrong).
He then should have defined the strict limitations of the use of Executive Orders from wherever that source is, whether the Federalist papers, or from the Constitution.
And then, he should have read the pertinent Constitutional jurisdiction of the Executive Branch over appointments to the minor courts. This sequence of teaching jurisdictional authority would have laid the case for him to fire or break up the 9th Circuit from placing their authority above the Executive Branch. (I am unsure of his right to fire vs call for Congressional Impeachment)
If I were he, I would have fired them on national TV, and had their pink slips ready and waved them in the air and (in my wildest dreams told them to go to h*ll for their subversion of our Constitutional Republic).
I have thought about this first mistake he made, what golden opportunities that were there, where the entire country could have been schooled in authority, law and jurisdiction. And I would have LOVED seeing the horror on the faces of Ginsberg, Roberts, and the rest. They KNOW who appoints Judges and Justices.
They are NOT SUPREME. Nor are they appointed for life. I would have brought that up, too.
I wish I had access to Trump....