Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

Recommended by:

pheilman_

TideGlider

From: t4texas	10/14/2013 12:05:06 PM
	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) of 793529

maybe some of you constitutional lawyers or other constitutional and supreme court knowledgeable people can help me with my line item veto question. i understand the supreme court ruled the line item veto was unconstitutional (see 1998 ruling in link below plus a LOT more background reading material) fifteen years ago. now my furrowed brow question: if the president does not veto a law but signs it into law, can the president constitutionally decide not to implement or enforce parts of the law that he does not want to implement or enforce? how is that different from a tacit line item veto? what has the supreme court written about this kind of situation? i thought the president, in the text of the constitution, is supposed to enforce and obey the laws the congress passes and the president signs into law. why have some citizens or the republicans not challenged obama's selective enforcement of some laws that would eventually get to the supreme court level? law.umaryland.edu

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next