Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Latest EO: Only the President can speak "for what the law is"

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by citygator, Feb 18, 2025.

  1. citygator

    citygator VIP Member

    13,538
    2,821
    3,303
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
    If you cant trust Trumpsky to follow the law, who can you trust?

    Trump signs executive order allowing only attorney general or president to interpret meaning of laws - Washington Times



    The document asserts that “previous administrations have allowed so-called ‘independent regulatory agencies’ to operate with minimal Presidential supervision.”

    “These regulatory agencies currently exercise substantial executive authority without sufficient accountability to the President, and through him, to the American people,” the order said. “Moreover, these regulatory agencies have been permitted to promulgate significant regulations without review by the President.”
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    16,387
    13,378
    1,853
    Apr 8, 2007
    Exactly what the founders had in mind, right? We have an emperor.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Orange_and_Bluke

    Orange_and_Bluke Premium Member

    11,050
    2,670
    3,288
    Dec 16, 2015
    You libbies have done this to yourselves…
    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. slocala

    slocala VIP Member

    3,802
    835
    2,028
    Jan 11, 2009
    Congress write laws and often includes that they give authority to the regulating agency to draft regulations. Often the Regulations are codified with the full effect of the law. So… in some ways, Trump is right. Congress gave power to the Executive Branch. If Trump says all Regulations require his oversight, well… that is a late night of reading for him.

    Now an unlawful Regulation can be thrown out if not in accordance with Congress’ intent. But, which Judge is going to have an army to fight the Executive Branch if they say “come and make me?”
     
  5. exiledgator

    exiledgator Gruntled

    11,776
    2,153
    3,128
    Jan 5, 2010
    Maine
    Article III deleted.

    Yay, America
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 2
  6. Gator515151

    Gator515151 GC Hall of Fame

    22,867
    1,078
    1,763
    Apr 4, 2007
    You need to go to work for the NYT or MSNBC, you are a master at writing misleading titles. Read the first paragraph of the article you linked, it reads nothing like the title you wrote. Totally misleading.

    President Trump on Tuesday signed an executive order declaring that only the attorney general or the president, instead of federal regulators or bureaucrats, can speak for the U.S. when interpreting the meaning of laws carried out by the executive branch.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  7. dangolegators

    dangolegators GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 26, 2007
    Is this a joke?
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  8. HeyItsMe

    HeyItsMe GC Hall of Fame

    2,034
    590
    2,088
    Mar 7, 2009
    And by President, he means himself and himself only. Everyone else in his position has to follow the letter of the law to the utmost T. Quite dictatory of him to say.
     
  9. citygator

    citygator VIP Member

    13,538
    2,821
    3,303
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
    Title can only be so long. I linked his own Trumpsky words and a right wing rag article for balance and it’s still not good enough? You guys kill me.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Orange_and_Bluke

    Orange_and_Bluke Premium Member

    11,050
    2,670
    3,288
    Dec 16, 2015
    It’s puzzling why many solid pubs respond to the disingenuous libbie posters in here.
    I’ve finally learned my lesson.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Gatorrick22

    Gatorrick22 GC Hall of Fame

    90,017
    27,110
    4,613
    Apr 3, 2007
    Tell me when they find out how all the U.S. Congress became multimillionaires on their salaries.
     
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  12. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    9,717
    2,192
    3,013
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    So is this an executive order overturning Marbury v Madison? Okay then.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 2
  13. ncargat1

    ncargat1 GC Hall of Fame

    14,621
    6,364
    3,353
    Dec 11, 2009
    Same way Trump did. Grifting.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  14. ncargat1

    ncargat1 GC Hall of Fame

    14,621
    6,364
    3,353
    Dec 11, 2009
    You are not wrong on this one. Not only did the Democrats bring this on, they are lying down like a bunch of broken bitches and not standing up for any of this stuff. I am not sure who disgusts me more, Trump and his cult of mental midgets, or the Democrats in Congress who have seemingly surrendered their spines, as well as their self-respect over fear of being voted out of office.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  15. G8tas

    G8tas GC Hall of Fame

    5,358
    1,008
    553
    Sep 22, 2008
    By selling gold shoes and NFT's
     
  16. vegasfox

    vegasfox GC Hall of Fame

    2,899
    239
    113
    Feb 4, 2024
    Senator Kennedy: Democrats need to try harder not to suck
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  17. dynogator

    dynogator VIP Member

    6,765
    355
    418
    Apr 9, 2007
    It's hardly only the Dems who are missing a spine. The Pub congressmen aren't exactly covering themselves in glory.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  18. dangolegators

    dangolegators GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 26, 2007
    The funny thing about this is that Trump is probably the person in the entire federal government who knows the least about what the law is.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  19. slocala

    slocala VIP Member

    3,802
    835
    2,028
    Jan 11, 2009
    There are approximately 200 volumes to the CFR. Bondi will have to hire a lot of people to make sure she can interpret and faithfully execute.
     
  20. demosthenes

    demosthenes Premium Member

    9,551
    1,180
    3,218
    Apr 3, 2007
    This is more an issue of delegation than ultimate interpretation of the law. It’s inefficient and in this case it is bypassing the purpose of having agency/department heads confirmed by Congress.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1