A True President
[media=https://youtu.be/okd5J56423M]
this is how one should behave
this is how one should behave
61-69, M
bookerdana · M
markinkansas · 61-69, M
@bookerdana then ya got this [media=https://youtu.be/BhyFmE665k0]
bookerdana · M
@markinkansas I've seen the hi-light reel..sicc burn,man
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
While I do like Obama, in all truth though, in order to codifying the attorney general not doing what the president says would require a constitutional amendment.
Any supreme Court would overrule such a congressional law. It's that simple. This supreme Court has already proven that.
Any supreme Court would overrule such a congressional law. It's that simple. This supreme Court has already proven that.
markinkansas · 61-69, M
@DeWayfarer with the right people in the right spot you can do what ya want.. a lot needs to change . grin
DeWayfarer · 61-69, M
@markinkansas I will give what GTP 5.0 says on this, if it should make any difference. Which I'm certain most will object to.
You’re essentially right: removing presidential control over the attorney general in a lasting, constitutionally secure way would likely require a constitutional amendment.
Brief points:
The Constitution vests executive power in the President and establishes appointment/removal powers; Congress can regulate some aspects of offices but cannot contravene core separation-of-powers principles without risking a constitutional challenge.
A statute attempting to strip the President of effective control over a principal officer (like the AG) would likely face Supreme Court review; recent decisions have shown the Court will enforce limits on congressional limits that meaningfully impede presidential control.
Therefore, a durable change to that relationship would most securely be made by amending the Constitution rather than by ordinary legislation.
Brief points:
The Constitution vests executive power in the President and establishes appointment/removal powers; Congress can regulate some aspects of offices but cannot contravene core separation-of-powers principles without risking a constitutional challenge.
A statute attempting to strip the President of effective control over a principal officer (like the AG) would likely face Supreme Court review; recent decisions have shown the Court will enforce limits on congressional limits that meaningfully impede presidential control.
Therefore, a durable change to that relationship would most securely be made by amending the Constitution rather than by ordinary legislation.
Rutterman · 46-50, M
Heard the entire interview when it aired last night. The contrast between the 44th president and the current president couldn't be more stark. One acts presidential and the other one acts like (and is, in fact) an Internet troll.