I think Sally Kohn put it rather well, even if she went a little too easy on him IMO.
Sally Kohn? Bwuhaha. Why pick such a hack to quote?
But I'll indulge her with more respect than she deserves by addressing some of her comments.
That man is a joke, and a bad one at that. I think he really believes his constituents are morons with no concept of time and history. Add another PR stunt to the pile, the GOTP has little else to do apparently.
Sheesh, she writes like some of the more rabid Lefty posters here.
"If you're looking for an example of stretching that authority to the point of breaking it, perhaps you shouldn't scrutinize a former Constitutional law professor but instead his predecessors. "I believe in a strong, robust executive authority," Vice President Dick Cheney said in 2005. "The president of the United States needs to have his constitutional powers unimpaired."
Notice the actual words (not like they're important or anything, huh?)
Nothing really wrong with anyone claiming
their constitutional powers shouldn't be impaired.
The question wrt Obama is if he is stepping
outside his constitutional powers. These are different issues. Too bad Sally can't figure it out.
Cheney, for instance, described the War Powers Act -- in which a president must gain the approval of Congress before launching armed conflict -- as an unconstitutional "infringement on the authority of the presidency."
Not exactly sure what Cheney was saying since his remark is clearly out-of-context. Not sure what Sally is trying is trying to say, but taking her words at face value she is wrong in her assessment of War Powers Act and the Constitution. The President
can launch military forces without congressional approval. Sure the President is somewhat limited by the Constitution. E.g., the President can defend against an imminent threat without Congress' approval. That is, in fact, his constitutional obligation. I.e., her blanket statement is erroneous.
In both number and scope, President Obama's use of executive actions simply pales against this and other actions one could compare."
The number of executive actions is irrelevant no matter how many times the Left struggles to claim it so.
The question is scope and that's what the lawsuit would be about. She's welcome to her opinion about that but others disagree:
Jonathan Turley, the lefty constitutional law professor is one who disagrees with her:
Americans are in danger of losing their liberties as the country shifts to an "imperial presidency," with power concentrated in the executive branch, constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley said on Fox News.
Turley, who teaches at George Washington University, agrees with much of President Barack Obama's political positions, but fears Obama is moving the United States toward a system in which the president's power is unchecked by Congress and the courts.
Turley said Obama's failure to inform Congress he was releasing five Taliban prisoners from the military prison in Guantanamo Bay over the weekend is the latest example of his ignoring the law.
"This has become something of a mantra from this administration that the president has decided he will not comply with federal law," Turley said Tuesday on Fox News Channel's "Hannity."
"What's emerging is an imperial presidency, an über-presidency as I've called it, where the president can act unilaterally," Turley said. Turley was among several witnesses testifying before the House Judiciary Committee in February, in which he warned of a constitutional crisis if Congress fails to maintain its power.
America's system of government has been stable because there are limited and shared powers, Turley said. But if one branch emerges dominant, the system will begin to shut down.
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Jonathan-Turley-Obama-presidency-power/2014/06/04/id/575014/
Even Dem lawmakers have expressed concern:
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said he was not concerned that Obama was circumventing Congress so he would delay his signature health care law, but had real concerns about presidential overreach on war powers and surveillance issues. "Everything we're talking about today is laughable in the face of these problems," Nadler said.
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2013/12/legal-experts-criticize-obamas-executive-actions.html
Trying to pass this off as a phony issue and nothing more than a partisan "stunt" is unsupportable and ridiculous.
I don't know if a lawsuit is the proper recourse, but no one seems to have a better idea.
Fern