There’s no excuse for violating the Constitution


On Thursday night, President Obama will do what he thinks he does best: take his message directly to the people. In a televised address to the nation the president will make his case for amnesty for illegal immigrants and attempt to rationalize excessive executive actions.

The liberal media will probably use all sorts of rhetorical gymnastics to excuse a president who willfully exceeds his Constitutionally-derived powers simply because he has some policy disagreements with Congress. They will argue that it’s Republicans’ fault for stymieing action on Capitol Hill. They (and the president) will probably also offer some convoluted variant of an argument that goes like this: Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush did it first.

Among intelligent people this is more commonly known as crapola.

As outlined in a piece at The Federalist[1], President Obama’s imminent executive order on amnesty looks nothing like what Presidents Reagan and Bush did in 1987 and 1989.

In the case of President Reagan, he used an executive order to correct an oversight in amnesty legislation that Congress had already passed. The oversight was causing some children and spouses to face deportation when their immediate family member was eligible to stay. Reagan didn’t unilaterally enact new policy; he simply addressed an oversight in a law that Congress had already passed. Bush extended Reagan’s original executive order a few years later.

The differences between Reagan and Bush, and President Obama are huge. President Obama would have us believe it is within his authority to unilaterally change immigration policy without Congress’ consent.  Such arguments are as dangerous as they are misguided.

We have no doubt that Americans will see right through Obama’s thinly-veiled attempt at rationalizing his drastic twisting of the law by deceptively citing the actions of two Republican presidents. At the end of the day, there’s no good excuse for violating the Constitution.