imported post
Executive Orders are directives to federal agencies, not laws. The effect we feel from XOs apply to changes made in how federal agencies exercise the Orders; case in point being the XO directing the ATF to enforce 18 U.S.C. § 925(d)(3) prohibiting frames, receivers or barrels for otherwise non-importable firearms to be imported into the United States, signed in '89 by Daddy Bush. Additionally, XOs establish new federalagencies, trade directives, and operational changes. To date, only two XOs have had to be overturned for overstepping the line. Obama simply cannot just whip out his pen and take away everyone's guns; he can only direct federal agencies to handle their duties differently.
And Wrightme, you are correct, Clinton's silly ban SHOULD have been overturned, but to overturn an unconstitutional law it first has to be challenged. In order for the Supreme Court to consider a challenge, theappellant has to have the necessarystanding to be heard. DC v Heller originally had six petitioners, but the SC invalidated all but Mr. Heller, who was the only one who had standing to sue for declaratory and injunctive relief. As far as I know, nobody made a challenge to Slick Willie's glorious piece of nonsense, although I'm sure many would have had standing. Not too many people were prosecuted under that idiocy in the first place.
And yes, I know Congress does whatever it pleases without the slightest regard to the rules that apply to them. Even Dubya has been busted expressing his contempt for that darned pesky Constitution; when advise that portions of the Patriot Act were in violation of the Constitution, Bush retorted vehemently “Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,it’s just a goddamned piece of paper!” Lays out pretty clear the government's position on preserving our republic.
Always remember, the government can only do what we ALLOW them to do. Never underestimate the power of mass non-compliance.
