Liberal law prof: Obama’s unconstitutional power grabs are creating a “very dangerous and unstable system”

posted at 8:01 pm on December 3, 2013 by Allahpundit

Good stuff from Jonathan Turley at today’s House hearing on executive power, although I regret that I couldn’t find a more user-friendly format for you to watch. There’s no compilation clip; you’ll have to make do with the C-SPAN embed by fast-forwarding to the time cues I give you and being patient while the vid buffers (and buffers, and buffers). At 1:10:55 he describes the “royal prerogative” that the Constitution was designed to eliminate but which Obama, through the growth of the administrative state and his own expansive view of executive discretion, is now flirting with. At 2:53:45, he applies that concept to O’s war powers, specifically vis-a-vis Libya and the White House “kill list.” If you have time for only one snippet, though, skip to 2:33:00 for his list of Obama’s five most egregious violations of separation of powers. Some are familiar to you — declaring that he wouldn’t deport illegals who might qualify for DREAM, refusing to enforce the employer mandate, etc — but the ones about him shifting money around without regard to how Congress has appropriated it might not be. Turley makes two valuable points here. One: Courts tend to give the executive a wide berth in separation-of-powers challenges on the theory that Congress has the power of the purse and can defund any executive agency it likes. But that’s not true anymore, he says. Obama, by defying appropriations, has claimed some of that power for himself. What check does Congress have left? That brings us to point two: Even if Congress can’t stop Obama, the courts can. The problem there, though, says Turley, is that O and the DOJ have argued successfully in many cases that no one has standing to sue him because no one can show an injury from his power grabs that’s concrete enough to justify a federal lawsuit. So the courts can’t check him either.

The only check is to beat him at the polls, and since he’s now term-limited, there’s no real check there apart from his party’s fear that they’ll be punished for his excesses instead. Show of hands: Who thinks Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi will keep Obama in line? Before you answer, note that leading amnesty shill Luis Gutierrez argued at this same hearing that, if anything, Obama should have a freer hand so that he can go about unilaterally legalizing the illegals Gutierrez has been effectively representing in Congress for years. That’s what’s left of Democratic opposition to the imperial executive.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

“Good stuff” indeed, from Turley, who’s not a rightie at all.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2013 at 8:03 PM

How many years until we follow Venezuela’s path?

besser tot als rot on December 3, 2013 at 8:05 PM

I wonder if Cuba has a Mt. Rushmore….

’cause Obama would fit well there…

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:06 PM

Watch the Goebbelses, under a R president…and see them now.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2013 at 8:07 PM

What you are going to get is when a conservative is president he will, thanks to Obama’s lawless precedent, feel that he (or she!) can take the law into their hands as well, congress be damned. Obama is screwing our whole constitution which our founding fathers labored to create. Obama took an oath to not do that.

anotherJoe on December 3, 2013 at 8:08 PM

Don’t miss this either.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2013 at 8:08 PM

How much unconstitutional stuff does a president have to do to at least get the conversation going of impeachment? I would like to think Obama long has passed the threshold for that…Crap I’d like to see Republicans at least talk about how unlawful this administration is but can’t even get that..This man has truly gotten away with murder

sadsushi on December 3, 2013 at 8:09 PM

No sh*t Sherlock! One legacy of Obama will be specific, namely the utter failure of his “signature” legislation. The other will be general, namely the complete indifference to staying within the law and honoring his oath of office.

Fafhrd on December 3, 2013 at 8:10 PM

Turley is a civil libertarian according to Fox News.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2004/12/10/patriot-act-ii-irks-civil-libertarians/?intcmp=related

stingray9813 on December 3, 2013 at 8:12 PM

That’s what’s left of Democratic opposition to the imperial executive.

Their only lucky charm is the stupidity of the Rs.

Otherwise they’d rue the day when they are NO longer in power.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2013 at 8:12 PM

If the Rs had a brain, BIG if, they’d inform the land that her only salvation, ahead of Jan. 2017, w/b super-majorities in 2014.

The key word is “If”.

Schadenfreude on December 3, 2013 at 8:14 PM

Obama is a Dictator

workingclass artist on December 3, 2013 at 8:16 PM

besser tot als rot I’ve felt we’ve been in “Venezuela territory” for years already.

EG (waving) I told my Cuban gf’s Mom 80 yrs young today that we are well on our way to being Cuba.

The clips of Gowdy from this hearing are well worth watching. We need more of these guys up there.

The only guy on the panel who is all up O’s grill was Simon Lazarus, Senior Council of The Constitutional Accountability Center.

“The Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC) is a think tank, law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of our Constitution’s text and history. We work in our courts, through our government, and with legal scholars to preserve the rights and freedoms of all Americans and to protect our judiciary from politics and special interests…”

http://theusconstitution.org/about

Now I’m trying to see if I can find out if this CAC is funded by Soros.

CoffeeLover on December 3, 2013 at 8:16 PM

The State Run Media will run clips of Turley’s condemnation of Dear Leader over and over…maybe they will even have him in studio to discuss it…?

d1carter on December 3, 2013 at 8:17 PM

Obama’s unconstitutional power grabs are creating a “very dangerous and unstable system”

Turley was also Sandra Fluke’s biggest defender when it came to the right of worthless bar sluts not having to pay for their own birth control.

Happy Nomad on December 3, 2013 at 8:17 PM

For Obama to be stopped, the courts are going to have to recognize that legislators have standing when they say he is refusing to faithfully execute the laws he is sworn to uphold. Otherwise Obama will continue to ignore laws or portions of laws he doesn’t like, in effect issuing an unconstitutional executive repeal.

Stoic Patriot on December 3, 2013 at 8:18 PM

CoffeeLover on December 3, 2013 at 8:16 PM

Waving back…:)

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:19 PM

I hope no one gets physically harmed as the coup progresses…

d1carter on December 3, 2013 at 8:19 PM

By the time King Barack leaves center stage the country will be in a shambles. Do the Democrats actually believe another Democrat will follow into the White House? In other words, will people really be that STUPID?

GarandFan on December 3, 2013 at 8:20 PM

I was surprised that 2 of them telling the hearing that they believed O was overstepping both admitted to supporting O.

CoffeeLover on December 3, 2013 at 8:20 PM

I think this is why we have the second amendment.

oldroy on December 3, 2013 at 8:20 PM

Turley was also Sandra Fluke’s biggest defender when it came to the right of worthless bar sluts not having to pay for their own birth control.

Happy Nomad on December 3, 2013 at 8:17 PM

Now hold on…..

Sandra is an uptown slut….

Still not worth a penny thought…

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:21 PM

though

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:22 PM

Congressional Democrats have allowed precedents to be set that will take years to fight. There are a few Republicans who have allowed this to happen also, Boehner and McConnell being 2 of them. I know I sound like a broken record, but Boehner should not have signed the CR’s which have kept the bloated spending of Obama’s first 2 years intact. Much of the illegality this president does stems from that because he’s got the money to do it. The House has given up the power of the purse by signing CR’s and I don’t see them getting it back any time soon.

bflat879 on December 3, 2013 at 8:24 PM

Um liberal law professors said these same things under Bush and you all screamed academic bias…..

libfreeordie on December 3, 2013 at 8:27 PM

We had the Lochner era, but it didn’t last long. Dogeater has even referenced it,, hence the filibuster change on appointments.

Won’t happen again.

wolly4321 on December 3, 2013 at 8:27 PM

Isn’t it Boehner and McConnell’s job to stop this?

No Chop Charlie on December 3, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Um liberal law professors said these same things under Bush and you all screamed academic bias…..

libfreeordie on December 3, 2013 at 8:27 PM

Did Bush take over 1/6 of the economy?

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:29 PM

Um liberal law professors said these same things under Bush and you all screamed academic bias…..

libfreeordie on December 3, 2013 at 8:27 PM

That’s a very general statement. Link please. Give specifics. Do your homework.

oldroy on December 3, 2013 at 8:29 PM

Either the gloves come off, or we lose.

wolly4321 on December 3, 2013 at 8:32 PM

One: Courts tend to give the executive a wide berth in separation-of-powers challenges on the theory that Congress has the power of the purse and can defund any executive agency it likes. But that’s not true anymore, he says. Obama, by defying appropriations, has claimed some of that power for himself. What check does Congress have left?

Give him an ultimatum on appropriations – list the offending violations, and announce in a major speech: “Mr. President, it is illegal for you to violate the separation of powers. You must rescind these orders immediately, or we will be forced to begin drawing up articles of impeachment tomorrow. I regret that it has come to this, but we have warned you time and again and you have refused to abide by the law. Please do not force us to do this.”

It’s important to give him the warning and opportunity to back down first, though, or it will just seem like opportunism. The public needs to see that Obama brought any further action on himself.

Not sure if it’s better to do this now, or after hopefully taking back the senate, to have at least some hope for success. But congress needs to take a stand here, even if ultimately unsuccessful, in order to push back and set a precedent for future presidents that this nonsense will not be tolerated.

RINO in Name Only on December 3, 2013 at 8:35 PM

All hail His Majesty Hussein the First! Sieg Heil !!!

Steve Z on December 3, 2013 at 8:37 PM

That’s a very general statement. Link please. Give specifics. Do your homework.

oldroy on December 3, 2013 at 8:29 PM

It left….

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:37 PM

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:37 PM

He was asked to backup his statement. They usually run at this point LOL.

CoffeeLover on December 3, 2013 at 8:39 PM

Libfree? Dump and run again? Not the great thinker, writer and orator you claim to be? Can support a single thing that you blurt out?

oldroy on December 3, 2013 at 8:39 PM

CoffeeLover on December 3, 2013 at 8:39 PM

Yep…it appears so..

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:41 PM

If we’re going to impeach him, now would be a good time. What Dem is willing to throw their political career away for this miserable failure? What dem is going to throw itself under that big black bus? Why do they support Barack’s Kill List? Strange days we are in…

/Scary, too

Key West Reader on December 3, 2013 at 8:42 PM

Key West Reader on December 3, 2013 at 8:42 PM

Remember…
We have Dems that think we landed man on Mars….

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:43 PM

Remember…
We have Dems that think we landed man on Mars….

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:43 PM

And we have some that think the manned mars landing was a hoax used to cover up the news of the island of Guam tipping over.

oldroy on December 3, 2013 at 8:47 PM

If we’re going to impeach him, now would be a good time. What Dem is willing to throw their political career away for this miserable failure? What dem is going to throw itself under that big black bus? Why do they support Barack’s Kill List? Strange days we are in…
/Scary, too

Key West Reader on December 3, 2013 at 8:42 PM

Maybe, but impeachment is a totally different animal than simply opposition.

Also, if we’re at the point where a successful impeachment and conviction is even remotely possible, then we should be repealing Obamacare first – no one who is still supporting that is going to vote to impeach.

RINO in Name Only on December 3, 2013 at 8:52 PM

Remember…
We have Dems that think we landed man on Mars….

Electrongod on December 3, 2013 at 8:43 PM

And we have some that think the manned mars landing was a hoax used to cover up the news of the island of Guam tipping over.

oldroy on December 3, 2013 at 8:47 PM

Sheila Jackson Lee. Mmm Hmm!

Key West Reader on December 3, 2013 at 8:52 PM

Obama is a Dictator

workingclass artist on December 3, 2013 at 8:16 PM

Yes, but it was the inevitable result of the congress abdicating its powers over the last 50 years or so by allowing far too much executive power discretion and leeway in its legislation. For the separation of powers concept to work, each branch must steadfastly protect its own branch from usurpation, which the founders assumed would be a no-brainer based on their unique history. They did, however, predict what is happening now should these branches fail to do so.

The difference is, while congress and to some degree the court’s have compromised themselves over these many years, all the presidents during this time for the most part showed respect for the separation of powers doctrine, even if they didn’t have to. Obama is the first president who has completely ignored the concept and, for the most part, can legally do so due to the laziness and false sense of security that past congresses and even the current one have languished.

It was the perfect storm, and a radical like Obama knew it going in. When we get rid of this cancer of a man, all of the laws need to be revisited to re-establish the proper roles of the congress and the courts, so that this may never happen again. Oh, well, one can dream.

TXUS on December 3, 2013 at 8:53 PM

How much unconstitutional stuff does a president have to do to at least get the conversation going of impeachment? I would like to think Obama long has passed the threshold for that…Crap I’d like to see Republicans at least talk about how unlawful this administration is but can’t even get that..This man has truly gotten away with murder

sadsushi on December 3, 2013 at 8:09 PM

If you disagree with this man, you’re a racist. If you draw up articles of impeachment, you may as well get fitted for a nice, white sheet. You know that’s what Boehner is thinking and that’s why he doesn’t do it.

Kafir on December 3, 2013 at 8:55 PM

Ok, how do we stop him and please don’t tell me it is impossible. We have a constitution, laws, checks and balances. I suggest “we” collectively grow a pair and put a stop to this tyrannical administration. This isn’t over and we are not doomed. I refuse to believe some socialist punk is going to be the undoing of this country.

Oink on December 3, 2013 at 8:56 PM

Obama is the first president who has completely ignored the concept and, for the most part, can legally do so due to the laziness and false sense of security that past congresses and even the current one have languished.

It was the perfect storm, and a radical like Obama knew it going in. When we get rid of this cancer of a man, all of the laws need to be revisited to re-establish the proper roles of the congress and the courts, so that this may never happen again. Oh, well, one can dream.

TXUS on December 3, 2013 at 8:53 PM

I think it started with FDR and his threat to stack the court if they didn’t start finding his New Deal programs constitutional.

What needs to happen is for the next R president to abuse his power in the same way Øbama has. Then the Congressional R’s and D’s will get together to pass amendments properly restricting the executive.

Kafir on December 3, 2013 at 8:59 PM

How many years months until we follow Venezuela’s path?

besser tot als rot on December 3, 2013 at 8:05 PM

VorDaj on December 3, 2013 at 9:00 PM

Imagine the howls from the left if a Republican president decided not to enforce copyrights on music, television programing, or movies over three years old, claiming he was using prosecutorial discretion.

agmartin on December 3, 2013 at 9:02 PM

Obama is screwing our whole constitution which our founding fathers labored DIED to create. Obama took an oath to not do that.

anotherJoe on December 3, 2013 at 8:08 PM

DIED by the thousands…”out Lives, our Souls, and our Sacred Honor”.

Who is John Galt on December 3, 2013 at 9:06 PM

Kafir on December 3, 2013 at 8:59 PM

You’re right about FDR but the congress back then stood its ground, even the Dems against a Dem president. That’s not happening today of course.

TXUS on December 3, 2013 at 9:08 PM

it started with FDR and his threat to stack the court if they didn’t start finding his New Deal programs constitutional.

That was the Lochner era, and barky understands it full well. The Courts went pro free market, and FDR squashed them .

wolly4321 on December 3, 2013 at 9:13 PM

you’re right about FDR but the congress back then stood its ground, even the Dems against a Dem president. That’s not happening today of course. TXUS on December 3, 2013 at 9:08 PM

If that was true, his threat to pack the Court with 15 black robes wouldn’t have worked. Yet it did.

wolly4321 on December 3, 2013 at 9:20 PM

Liberal law prof: Obama’s unconstitutional power grabs are creating a “very dangerous and unstable system”, so naturally to stabilize the system, he needs to gain even more power and the TEA Party and the GOP need to barred from all political activity.

————-

it started with FDR and his threat to stack the court if they didn’t start finding his New Deal programs constitutional.

FDR was a nasty, cynical, Socialist. I would say I can’t believe that enough voters bought into his populist nonsense, but after the Obummer election and re-election, I think the “greatest generation” has indeed been topped in the gullibility department.

Dr. ZhivBlago on December 3, 2013 at 9:22 PM

Isn’t it Boehner and McConnell’s job to stop this?

No Chop Charlie on December 3, 2013 at 8:28 PM

Ahhhhhhahahahahahahahaha… whew.

Cut it out, man. You’re killin’ me.

Boehner and McConnell’s job is to stomp out the annoying strain of conservatism that seems to still exist in this country, and to make it safe for the status quo, with which they’re both fine. Fortunately, they’re both such candy-ass putzes that they’re not especially good at it, or much of anything else.

bofh on December 3, 2013 at 9:23 PM

A banana republic, we have become.

southsideironworks on December 3, 2013 at 9:26 PM

FDR owned the 73rd Congress..

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/73rd_United_States_Congress.

If there was pushback,, you’ll have to cite it for me. Seems to me his programs rolled through.

wolly4321 on December 3, 2013 at 9:27 PM

How many years until we follow Venezuela’s path?

besser tot als rot on December 3, 2013 at 8:05 PM

…did you mean….months?

KOOLAID2 on December 3, 2013 at 9:30 PM

A banana republic, we have become.

southsideironworks on December 3, 2013 at 9:26 PM

Yeah, but we get free flat screen TVs and stuff. All we have to do is break down the store doors while the police stand around and watch. Now, for TP, I’m not sure what we’re going to do…I’d hate to support the LS print media in any way just for the sake of personal hygiene.

Dr. ZhivBlago on December 3, 2013 at 9:30 PM

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lochner_era.

wolly4321 on December 3, 2013 at 9:31 PM

Um liberal law professors said these same things under Bush and you all screamed academic bias…..

libfreeorgan on December 3, 2013 at 8:27 PM

…because it was you…nimrod!

KOOLAID2 on December 3, 2013 at 9:32 PM

Liberal law professor means he is for bending the Constitution but just not to much.

CW20 on December 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_federal_legislation,_1901-2001.

1931-1941. Show me d on d violence.

Fact is, barky knows this period well. It’s the same playbook. Including the Courts.

wolly4321 on December 3, 2013 at 9:49 PM

Um liberal law professors said these same things under Bush and you all screamed academic bias…..

libfreeordie on December 3, 2013 at 8:27 PM

lol

Del Dolemonte on December 3, 2013 at 10:10 PM

Um liberal law professors said these same things under Bush and you all screamed academic bias…..

libfreeordie on December 3, 2013 at 8:27 PM

You got a point, princess…?

Solaratov on December 3, 2013 at 10:15 PM

The bloody HotAir page refresh killed the embedded video. Aghr.

ebrawer on December 3, 2013 at 10:37 PM

Um liberal law professors said these same things under Bush and you all screamed academic bias…..
 
libfreeordie on December 3, 2013 at 8:27 PM

 
Great point.
 
Imagine how much worse it became for them to say it about Obama.

rogerb on December 3, 2013 at 10:45 PM

Don’t worry when the next Republican is elected president the Democrats will re-discover their fear of the Imperial presidency, just as they’ll re-discover the homeless crisis and the problem of unemployment. Just as the MSM will re-discover its duty to tell truth to power. You see, it’s all cyclical.

Fred 2 on December 3, 2013 at 11:46 PM

Wow, that’s a liberal going after O’s slush funds.

PattyJ on December 4, 2013 at 1:24 AM

Before you answer, note that leading amnesty shill Luis Gutierrez argued at this same hearing that, if anything, Obama should have a freer hand so that he can go about unilaterally legalizing the illegals Gutierrez has been effectively representing in Congress for years. That’s what’s left of Democratic opposition to the imperial executive.

Very few, if any, of the Democrat caucus in Congress have any challenges with the imperial overreach that is now standard operating procedure in the Obama White House. To them, it’s all part of the necessary means to achieve the desired ends. And what is power really for – if it is not to be used / abused to further one’s goals?

And to highlight their bankruptcy on this, it will all end when the next Republican finds himself taking the Presidential oath of office. For while it’s perfectly acceptable that a Democrat President embrace and enact tyranny and abuse power to achieve the progressive agenda, the rules change 180 degrees when there isn’t a ‘D’ after the name of the occupant in the WH.

Athos on December 4, 2013 at 2:47 AM

For while it’s perfectly acceptable that a Democrat President embrace and enact tyranny and abuse power to achieve the progressive agenda, the rules change 180 degrees when there isn’t a ‘D’ after the name of the occupant in the WH.
 
Athos on December 4, 2013 at 2:47 AM

 
+1. One need look no farther than LFOD’s post. It wasn’t
 

Yes, this president is out of line.

 
It was
 

When Bush did it…

rogerb on December 4, 2013 at 6:49 AM

Remember all that liberal hyperventilating about the Unitary Executive during the Bush administration, and how very WRONG WRONG WRONG that was on principle?

LOL! Good times.

Good Lt on December 4, 2013 at 9:04 AM

So when do we start with the pitchforks? I’ve been ready since 09

neyney on December 4, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Will Obamacare be repealed or won’t it? Will Congress fund it or won’t it? Will the web site be fixed or wont it? Blah, blah, blah. We the people just need to do what we need to do and Congress be damned. Resist. Refuse. Revolt. EXEMPT OURSELVES! We did not comply with Prohibition and we simply should not comply with Obamacare. For religious reasons. For privacy reasons. For the cause of liberty and freedom and in protest of the idea that the federal government (under one party rule, no less), can force private citizens to purchase anything with our own money. Are we citizens or subjects? Mice or men(women)? Just say NO to socialism and to the corrupt, unionized, far left IRS: the gestapo of America’s political class. And have no fear; after all, the federal government ignores millions of illegals who are breaking U.S. immigration law every day and nothing happens to them! Our Founders pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. All we have to do is just say no to a scheme we all know is un-American and a violation of our most basic founding fundamentals of privacy, self reliance, limited government and individual freedom.
The Refusniks

devan95 on December 5, 2013 at 9:55 AM