Sunday, May 21, 2023

Congressional Dems: "Make us irrelevant"

Here's law professor Jonathan Turley: "Congressional Democrats beg Biden to nullify their existence."
Biden is not the first president to disregard legislative authority. But these members of the legislative branch are beseeching their leader to ignore them and their constitutional authority. Indeed, the most important power given to Congress under Article I is the “power of the purse.” It was the ultimate control over government. Whatever entanglements or commitments a president may seek, he must ultimately get the Congress to go along.

George Mason captured that intent when he declared that “no branch of government should ever be able to combine the power of the sword with the power of the purse.”

This purported 14th Amendment loophole would reduce the separation of powers doctrine to junk bond status.
It's shocking to think that Elizabeth Warren used to be a law professor.  She's now an acolyte of the Laurence Tribe school of "anything goes."

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Pretty funny headline in light of how irrelevant Kevin McCarthy is to getting 218 House votes for a passable bill. The hostage-holder is himself being held hostage by his fellow hostage-holders. Gee whiz, a 2022 red wave election could have squelched this problem, but, well, you know.

Cornell law professor and constitutional scholar Michael C. Dorf explains the "trilemma":

"Reaching the debt ceiling means that Congress has presented the President with three laws (or sets of laws) with which he cannot simultaneously comply: (1) Spend amount X. (2) Tax amount Y. (3) Borrow no more than Z, where X > Y + Z.

Adjusting X, Y, or Z would be a Presidential usurpation of congressional power over spending, taxation, or borrowing, respectively. Thus, there's a trilemma in which any of the realistic options is a violation of separation of powers. Adjusting X or Y would usurp a whole lot of legislative-style discretionary judgment. What spending should be suspended? When? Whose taxes should be raised? By how much?

By contrast, borrowing more than Z is precisely determined by Congress's other imperatives. How much more than Z should the President borrow? Exactly the shortfall between X and current revenues. So borrowing more than Z in just the amount determined by the revenue and spending laws is the least unconstitutional option."