Whether Barack Obama Has Violated the Constitution

Congress sometimes can be extremely uptight and difficult to get things done. That is just bound to happen if you have a room full of people from opposing parties.Obama in fact is notorious in not having conversation with Congress before putting through his actions. And not all the actions have been entirely accepted or worked the way they where supposed too. Maybe if he had put the action in place through Congress, they would be more refined. And yes, if that is how US politics work, something has to change. "Eventually we will need to have another meeting about revising the constitution for the betterment of the nation." Is that an invitation to a debate? I am up for it!Alright, back on track. I have to define some things to make my following arguments make sense. Legislative power:The power of Congress to make laws.http://www.law.cornell.edu...Executive power:The president: is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces. He or she has the power to call into service the state units of the National Guard, and in times of emergency may be given the power by Congress to manage national security or the economy. can issue executive orders, which have the force of law but do not have to be approved by congress. has the power make treaties with Senate approval. He or she can also receive ambassadors and work with leaders of other nations. is responsible for nominating the heads of governmental departments, which the Senate must then approve. In addition, the president nominates judges to federal courts and justices to the United States Supreme Court. can issue pardons for federal offenses. can convene Congress for special sessions. can veto legislation approved by Congress. However, the veto is limited. It is not a line-item veto, meaning that he or she cannot veto only specific parts of legislation, and it can be overridden by a two-thirds vote by Congress. delivers a State of the Union address annually to a joint session of Congress. http://www.law.cornell.edu... http://tisaboutfreedom.wordpress.com... The majority of these offences are that the President has extended his power a bit for humanitarian causes, to help immigrants, or to help poor patients. Any court would dismiss these offence in favor of the greater good. And to state my argument, the President has nearly only used Executive Orders a right he is granted in the constitution. It gives him the power to enact certain things without the approval of Congress. "Note: Executive Orders by the president were not designed for, nor do they give a president the authority to use as, a means to override or alter legislation or any other Constitutional violation." Do you know what a veto is? That clearly overrides a law but is completely constitutional. "Furthermore, Executive Orders apply only to employees of the Executive Branch. Any Executive Order that applies to non-government employees is in violation of Article I Section I. Congress has the authority and is oath bound to veto such Executive Orders." "Executive orders are directed to federal agencies that are charged with carrying out the order" http://usgovinfo.about.com... So not only executive employees, but any federal agency. To finalize my statement, the president has enacted several legislative actions that he was entitled to in the constitution, and has enacted executive orders that he was also entitled too, in the constitution. The website Pro has cited is filled with extremely stretched offences, bordering on completely wrong, so his viewpoint is not supported by good sources.