General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPolitico article on Trump POWER GRAB in SIGNING STATEMENT
son of a bitch -- this is why Pelosi was not invited.
[link:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/27/trump-congress-coronavirus-relief-oversight-152560|
But in a signing statement issued shortly after he approved the bill, Trump says he'll be the last word on whether this provision is followed.
"I do not understand, and my Administration will not treat, this provision as permitting the [inspector general] to issue reports to the Congress without the presidential supervision required" by Article II of the Constitution, Trump said in the signing statement.
Trump also indicated he would treat as optional a requirement in the bill that key congressional committees be consulted before Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of State or U.S. Agency for International Development spends or reallocates certain funds.
"These provisions are impermissible forms of congressional aggrandizement with respect to the execution of the laws," Trump says in the statement.
captain queeg
(10,207 posts)elleng
(130,954 posts)'No United States Constitution provision, federal statute, or common-law principle explicitly permits or prohibits signing statements. However, there is also no part of the Constitution that grants legal value to signing statements. Article I, Section 7 (in the Presentment Clause) empowers the president to veto a law in its entirety, to sign it, or to do nothing. Article II, Section 3 requires that the executive "take care that the laws be faithfully executed". The Constitution does not authorize the President to cherry-pick which parts of validly enacted Congressional Laws he is going to obey and execute, and which he is not.
Signing statements do not appear to have legal force by themselves, although they are all published in the Federal Register. As a practical matter, they may give notice of the way that the Executive intends to implement a law, which may make them more significant than the text of the law itself.[citation needed] There is a controversy about whether they should be considered as part of legislative history; proponents argue that they reflect the executive's position in negotiating with Congress; opponents assert that the executive's view of a law is not constitutionally part of the legislative history because only the Congress may make law.
Presidential signing statements maintain particular potency with federal executive agencies, since these agencies are often responsible for the administration and enforcement of federal laws. A 2007 article in the Administrative Law Review noted how some federal agencies' usage of signing statements may not withstand legal challenges under common law standards of judicial deference to agency action.'>>>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement
elleng
(130,954 posts)on MSNBC (Lawrence show.)
Essentially, Congress will do it's oversight work regardless.
Duppers
(28,125 posts)That the bill allows Steve Mnuchin to give money to whomever he pleases now without sufficient oversight yet in place?
Please tell me I misheard.
spanone
(135,841 posts)impeach him again if we must.
Criminal-in-chief
jimfields33
(15,809 posts)Problem is that the last two presidents used signing documents a number of times.
hangaleft
(649 posts)Whats laughable is his citations to the Constitution, which he disregards and violates on a daily basis.
CousinIT
(9,245 posts)He only asked them to write something legal that said he didn't have to follow the law after it was signed.
hangaleft
(649 posts)He has the vocabulary of a third grader. A dumb third grader.
I apologize to all third graders for having insulted them.
andym
(5,443 posts)elleng
(130,954 posts)andym
(5,443 posts)I thought that essentially the Democratic and Republican senators negotiated but didn't the Republicans included Mnuchin in on the discussions, as Trump's interests had to be satisfied with his explicit approval needed to proceed.
elleng
(130,954 posts)JDC
(10,128 posts)kentuck
(111,098 posts)Thank you.