From Investors Business Daily
Rule Of Law: First, the president issues unlawful executive orders giving illegal immigrants amnesty. Then, he dares an equal branch of government to vote on his orders’ legality so he can veto it. Is he establishing a monarchy?
While speaking at a town hall meeting Wednesday night at Florida International University, President Obama clearly indicated that he believes he is the final authority on law in this country. He will not tolerate dissent.
“If Mr. McConnell, the leader of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, want to have a vote on whether what I’m doing is legal or not, they can have that vote. I will veto that vote, because I’m absolutely confident that what we’re doing is the right thing to do,” he told a group organized by Democratic Rep. Jose Diaz-Balart.
Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?
In November, Obama announced a set of unilateral actions to change the immigration system. Government agencies were ordered not to enforce the law against up to 5 million illegal immigrants in the country. He also declared that they would not be subject to deportation and were to be handed green cards.
There was no vote in Congress. No consultation with the House and Senate. No law cited that gave him the authority. Just his word.
A month ago, we wondered if Obama was “so hellbent on amnesty for illegals he’ll resort to nullifying and even breaking the law.” Today, we know that he is.
Not even a federal judge’s ruling has stopped him from making and unmaking law as he sees fit. On Feb. 16, Southern Texas District Judge Andrew Hanen issued a temporary injunction against the administration’s executive lawmaking. “No, Mr. President,” said the George W. Bush appointee, “you and your party’s long-term political agenda are not above the law.”
The administration wants Hanen’s order lifted, but one should assume that even if the courts don’t rule Obama’s way, the White House will eventually do as it wishes and challenge the courts to stop it, just as it has taunted Congress.
Several times during Obama’s six years in office he has insisted he’s not a king able to act alone. He said it right up until he began to overtly behave as one.
House Speaker John Boehner’s office counted 22 times that Obama said “he couldn’t ignore or create his own immigration law.”
Yet at a time of his choosing, the president decided he could indeed create his own immigration law, just as he made changes to the Affordable Care Act as if it were his own set of commandments handed down from on high.
Obama is the president who said all he needed was a pen and a phone, that he wasn’t going to wait around for Congress to act.
He’s the Oval Office occupant who, while visiting Monticello, Thomas Jefferson’s home in Charlottesville, Va., a year ago with French President Francois Hollande, declared that it’s a “good thing as a president, I can do whatever I want.”
We said then and still believe today that if he meant that quip to be a joke, “it’s a bad one, for it accurately describes the psyche of a president who governs by executive order and regulation.”
A little more than a year after Obama’s re-election, the Washington Times reported that “from immigration to the minimum wage, congressional Democrats and liberal activists … urged Mr. Obama to declare an end run around Capitol Hill, assert executive authority and make as much progress as he can on the expansive agenda he laid out for his second term.”
They knew with whom they were dealing.
Obama well represents the political left, which has no time or respect for constitutional limits, the rule of law or power shared among the three branches.
Today’s leftists, loosely defined as “progressives,” want raw political power to enact their agenda. And from Obama they’re getting it.