NationStates

San Lumen wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Mhmm. Executive orders are just that, orders from the head of the executive to his subordinates.

Therefore what is to stop him from ordering all lockdowns to end and for colleges to bring their students back to campus?

He doesnt have the authority. Like you said earlier he could stick it in a stimulus bill as a carrot. Open state colleges and the feds will foot the TA's salary for example. But he does not have the authority to order it

You dont need to worry about this.

San Lumen wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Mhmm. Executive orders are just that, orders from the head of the executive to his subordinates.

Therefore what is to stop him from ordering all lockdowns to end and for colleges to bring their students back to campus?

Such an order would have no legal effect because none of the people enacting the lockdowns are his subordinates, nor are colleges. State governments don't work for Trump, they don't have to do what he says. Colleges don't work for Trump, they don't have to do what he says.

Ifreann wrote:

San Lumen wrote:Therefore what is to stop him from ordering all lockdowns to end and for colleges to bring their students back to campus?

Such an order would have no legal effect because none of the people enacting the lockdowns are his subordinates, nor are colleges. State governments don't work for Trump, they don't have to do what he says. Colleges don't work for Trump, they don't have to do what he says.

and he could threaten state governments, colleges and companies if they disobey him

Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:I'm sure the President has some lever he could pull, and despite it being clearly marked in red FOR EMERGENCIES ONLY, he hasn't found it yet.

Even Boris hasn't pulled that lever yet, as he has not yet invoked the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, but if he did then we may as well be renamed to Airstrip One. Big Boris is watching.

San Lumen wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Such an order would have no legal effect because none of the people enacting the lockdowns are his subordinates, nor are colleges. State governments don't work for Trump, they don't have to do what he says. Colleges don't work for Trump, they don't have to do what he says.

and he could threaten state governments, colleges and companies if they disobey him

Threaten them with what? They don't work for him. He cannot do anything to hurt any of them unless authorised by Congress to do so, and even then, Congress is limited in what it can authorise him to do.

The New California Republic wrote:

Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:I'm sure the President has some lever he could pull, and despite it being clearly marked in red FOR EMERGENCIES ONLY, he hasn't found it yet.

Even Boris hasn't pulled that lever yet, as he has not yet invoked the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, but if he did then we may as well be renamed to Airstrip One. Big Boris is watching.

I'd hope that if he did that, lots of international investers would start arbitration proceedings against the UK.

Ifreann wrote:

San Lumen wrote:and he could threaten state governments, colleges and companies if they disobey him

Threaten them with what? They don't work for him. He cannot do anything to hurt any of them unless authorised by Congress to do so, and even then, Congress is limited in what it can authorise him to do.

He could hold up funding for starters

Ifreann wrote:

San Lumen wrote:and he could threaten state governments, colleges and companies if they disobey him

Threaten them with what? They don't work for him. He cannot do anything to hurt any of them unless authorised by Congress to do so, and even then, Congress is limited in what it can authorise him to do.

They could use the commerce clause. Ending state lockdowns would certainly promote interstate commerce.

The New California Republic wrote:

Nobel Hobos 2 wrote:I'm sure the President has some lever he could pull, and despite it being clearly marked in red FOR EMERGENCIES ONLY, he hasn't found it yet.

Even Boris hasn't pulled that lever yet, as he has not yet invoked the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, but if he did then we may as well be renamed to Airstrip One. Big Boris is watching.

We both know he will.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Threaten them with what? They don't work for him. He cannot do anything to hurt any of them unless authorised by Congress to do so, and even then, Congress is limited in what it can authorise him to do.

They could use the commerce clause. Ending state lockdowns would certainly promote interstate commerce.

Congress, and no public health is local.

Congress is incredibly disappointing. They almost had a stimulus deal in the Senate, but then Speaker Pelosi convinced Senate Democrats to stop it so the House could put its version out there. The House's version is a partisan mess.

"The 1119-page bill is Christmas in March for liberal special interests. It imposes racial and gender pay equity provisions, diversity on corporate boards, increased use of minority-owned banks by federal offices, and a grab-bag of other diversity-themed requirements. It increases the collective bargaining power for unions and cancels all the debt owed by the U.S. Postal Service to the U.S. Treasury. For the global warming crowd there are increased fuel emission standards and required carbon offsets for airlines, plus tax credits for alternative energy programs. For the kids there is a provision for student loan payment deferment, and for the education bureaucrats who overcharge them a $9.5 billion giveaway to colleges and universities. It gives $100 million to juvenile justice programs, and suspends various aspects of enforcement of immigration laws."

I understand how Senate Democrats were concerned about the Republican plan, calling it a "corporate slush fund" (though one must wonder why they didn't have the same objection under Obama's stimulus), but this isn't the time to exploit a state of emergency and put riders on all your pet issues.

San Lumen wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Threaten them with what? They don't work for him. He cannot do anything to hurt any of them unless authorised by Congress to do so, and even then, Congress is limited in what it can authorise him to do.

He could hold up funding for starters

Not if Congress doesn't give him the authority to do so. And what possible reason could they have to do that?

Lumen, America is not a dictatorship under Trump, no matter how much you might want it to be now that his dictates might line up with your anxieties.

Hakons wrote:Congress is incredibly disappointing. They almost had a deal in the Senate, but then Speaker Pelosi convinced Democrats to stop it so the House could put its version out there. The House's version is a partisan mess.

"The 1119-page bill is Christmas in March for liberal special interests. It imposes racial and gender pay equity provisions, diversity on corporate boards, increased use of minority-owned banks by federal offices, and a grab-bag of other diversity-themed requirements. It increases the collective bargaining power for unions and cancels all the debt owed by the U.S. Postal Service to the U.S. Treasury. For the global warming crowd there are increased fuel emission standards and required carbon offsets for airlines, plus tax credits for alternative energy programs. For the kids there is a provision for student loan payment deferment, and for the education bureaucrats who overcharge them a $9.5 billion giveaway to colleges and universities. It gives $100 million to juvenile justice programs, and suspends various aspects of enforcement of immigration laws."

I understand how Senate Democrats were concerned about the Republican plan, calling it a "corporate slush fund" (though one must wonder why they didn't have the same objection under Obama's stimulus), but this isn't the time to exploit a state of emergency and put riders on all your pet issues.

Why in fucks name is this so difficult for people? Even the UK can manage this.

Nakena wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Even Boris hasn't pulled that lever yet, as he has not yet invoked the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, but if he did then we may as well be renamed to Airstrip One. Big Boris is watching.

We both know he will.

We'll see. It depends if some asshats don't abide by the rules.

Ethel mermania wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:They could use the commerce clause. Ending state lockdowns would certainly promote interstate commerce.

Congress, and no public health is local.

Congress is the obvious issue, but it wouldn't be argued under public health grounds. It'd be argued under economic ones.

The New California Republic wrote:

Nakena wrote:
We both know he will.

We'll see. It depends if some asshats don't abide by the rules.

a pandemic is not an excuse to create a dictatorship and suspend all civil liberties

San Lumen wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:We'll see. It depends if some asshats don't abide by the rules.

a pandemic is not an excuse to create a dictatorship and suspend all civil liberties

I never said it was, sense the tone.

Hakons wrote:Congress is incredibly disappointing. They almost had a deal in the Senate, but then Speaker Pelosi convinced Democrats to stop it so the House could put its version out there. The House's version is a partisan mess.

"The 1119-page bill is Christmas in March for liberal special interests. It imposes racial and gender pay equity provisions, diversity on corporate boards, increased use of minority-owned banks by federal offices, and a grab-bag of other diversity-themed requirements. It increases the collective bargaining power for unions and cancels all the debt owed by the U.S. Postal Service to the U.S. Treasury. For the global warming crowd there are increased fuel emission standards and required carbon offsets for airlines, plus tax credits for alternative energy programs. For the kids there is a provision for student loan payment deferment, and for the education bureaucrats who overcharge them a $9.5 billion giveaway to colleges and universities. It gives $100 million to juvenile justice programs, and suspends various aspects of enforcement of immigration laws."

I understand how Senate Democrats were concerned about the Republican plan, calling it a "corporate slush fund" (though one must wonder why they didn't have the same objection under Obama's stimulus), but this isn't the time to exploit a state of emergency and put riders on all your pet issues.

The American political system is broken. This type of earmarking is the norm.

San Lumen wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Such an order would have no legal effect because none of the people enacting the lockdowns are his subordinates, nor are colleges. State governments don't work for Trump, they don't have to do what he says. Colleges don't work for Trump, they don't have to do what he says.

and he could threaten state governments, colleges and companies if they disobey him

I thought you were against him doing such things?

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Even Boris hasn't pulled that lever yet, as he has not yet invoked the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, but if he did then we may as well be renamed to Airstrip One. Big Boris is watching.

I'd hope that if he did that, lots of international investers would start arbitration proceedings against the UK.

Nothing would come of it.

LRON wrote:

San Lumen wrote:and he could threaten state governments, colleges and companies if they disobey him

I thought you were against him doing such things?

When did I say otherwise?

San Lumen wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Mhmm. Executive orders are just that, orders from the head of the executive to his subordinates.

Therefore what is to stop him from ordering all lockdowns to end and for colleges to bring their students back to campus?

Because neither the colleges nor the state government are his subordinates.

San Lumen wrote:

Ifreann wrote:Such an order would have no legal effect because none of the people enacting the lockdowns are his subordinates, nor are colleges. State governments don't work for Trump, they don't have to do what he says. Colleges don't work for Trump, they don't have to do what he says.

and he could threaten state governments, colleges and companies if they disobey him

With what, exactly?

San Lumen wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:We'll see. It depends if some asshats don't abide by the rules.

a pandemic is not an excuse to create a dictatorship and suspend all civil liberties

Restriction on civil liberties is always an option in extreme national emergencies. Now, it would not have to occur if the average person was not a moron and followed guidelines but here we are.

Hakons wrote:Congress is incredibly disappointing. They almost had a deal in the Senate, but then Speaker Pelosi convinced Democrats to stop it so the House could put its version out there. The House's version is a partisan mess.

"The 1119-page bill is Christmas in March for liberal special interests. It imposes racial and gender pay equity provisions, diversity on corporate boards, increased use of minority-owned banks by federal offices, and a grab-bag of other diversity-themed requirements. It increases the collective bargaining power for unions and cancels all the debt owed by the U.S. Postal Service to the U.S. Treasury. For the global warming crowd there are increased fuel emission standards and required carbon offsets for airlines, plus tax credits for alternative energy programs. For the kids there is a provision for student loan payment deferment, and for the education bureaucrats who overcharge them a $9.5 billion giveaway to colleges and universities. It gives $100 million to juvenile justice programs, and suspends various aspects of enforcement of immigration laws."

I understand how Senate Democrats were concerned about the Republican plan, calling it a "corporate slush fund" (though one must wonder why they didn't have the same objection under Obama's stimulus), but this isn't the time to exploit a state of emergency and put riders on all your pet issues.

Those all seem like pretty sensible moves, or as close as one can expect from America's liberals. The point of this stimulus is to help all of America get through a pandemic, that means putting in provisions to make sure the corporate elites don't just line their own pockets.