I believe the O/P wrong. We shall see. ...That is real change you can believe in. I believe the O/P wrong. We shall see.... Well the OP is absolutely correct about what an Executive Order is. That doesn't mean an Executive Order can't have a noticeable effect in the real world. But it still is not a law or a regulation, it's still subject to the underlying statute or regulation it relates to, and it still is subject to constitutional limitations. ^ From the O/P - you are wrong "...people, their reaction is "well, then the President's just going to do it through an executive order! ZOMG!"" and "...it's unlikely the current White House would try to enact new regulations via executive order..." I disagree with both the O/P and your post. BO and the EO, a match made in ... Your post is pretty much unintelligible but the facts are: A President can't "just do it through an Executive Order." An Executive Order must be pursuant to an underlying statute or regulation and be consistent with the underlying statute or regulation, and an Executive Order must be constitutional. Executive Orders are subject to challenge in court. An Executive Order is not law. As the OP put it: Quote: Originally Posted by Tom Servo ...Executive orders exist for the President to clarify or facilitate enforcement of existing laws. They are not meant to enact new ones. The Executive branch does not have the power to create legislation.... Numerous international organizations