Skip to content

Yes, executive orders are 100% democratic

Published on 13 Comments on Yes, executive orders are 10013 democratic

I'm late to Festivus, but here's something from the new editor of National Review Online:

Oh ffs. This tweet was a response to progressives who have urged President Biden to issue executive orders to implement as much of the BBB bill as he can. As Klein knows perfectly well, this is entirely democratic as long as the orders comply with federal statutes. If there's a dispute about this, courts will settle it, just as the Constitution sets out. So:

  • Democratic: Signing legal executive orders and allowing courts to adjudicate them.
  • Not democratic: Trying to overthrow the results of a legal election. Passing legislation designed to allow state legislatures to overthrow the results of a legal election.

Are we, once and for all, clear about this?

13 thoughts on “Yes, executive orders are 100% democratic”

  2. Justin

    I haven’t posted this grievance in a while so let’s just remember that republicans are the enemy. If you see one, give them a great big…

  3. rick_jones

    When it is something to be done by your person in the White House then it is enlightened. When it isn't it is simply despotism.

    1. Ken Rhodes

      Rick, you may have missed this in Mr Drum’s post: or perhaps it was just to subtle for you, so I think perhaps you could read it really slow, with a pause after each word. I’ll even capitalize the key words for you:

      “ this is entirely democratic as long as the orders COMPLY WITH FEDERAL STATUTES.”

      1. rational thought

        No, I do not think Rick missed anything.

        It is more that Kevin missed the phrase in the tweet " when they don't have the votes to pass their agenda ".

        If talking about an executive action in that circumstance, by definition it is NOT when it would comly with federal statutes, because then you do not need any votes to pass am agenda. It is then already law due to a prior vote implementing that statute. And would not be part of your " agenda" for new laws if it is already law.

        Kevin creates a straw man to knock down which is just not there in the actual tweet.

    2. Jasper_in_Boston

      Then why do we need a legislative branch?

      Because the executive order isn't a sufficiently robust policy and law-making tool. That's why.

      That fact that executive orders are part of America's normal, democratic, constitutional order rather obviously doesn't mean they're a sufficient basis upon which to govern a great nation.

  6. JFO

    Phil Klein's a hack, he's the same guy who had that piece a while back about how the House Republicans who voted for the bipartisan infrastructure bill were wrong... to give Biden a "victory". Not a word about the merits of the bill, just the pure political angle.

    He also sucks to listen to, the National Review Editors podcast is usually a good window into relatively sane conservative/Republican thinking, but Klein manages to bring any episode down.

  7. sturestahle

    Executive orders in the way it’s used in USA exists, as far as I know, only in the US of A and the Philippines (another shining city on a hill?)
    The French president is also having some possibilities to act in the same way but his powers are limited compared to his American colleague.
    The powers of your president is comparable to a sovereign monarch from times gone by , an abomination in a country claiming to be a democracy
    You are presently having a benevolent one but we all remember how the situation was just last year…
    . Head of state
    . Leader of the government but contrary to in a parliamentary system doesn’t he have to listen to his ministers
    . Unchallenged commander of chief of the most powerful military in the history of mankind (no prior military experience needed)
    . Having the right to override the Congress (he only needs the support of 1/3 of the Senators and that’s inevitably in your archaic two party system)
    … and then it’s executive orders!
    “this is entirely democratic as long as the orders comply with federal statutes. If there's a dispute about this, courts will settle it, just as the Constitution sets out..” as Mr Drum points out .
    The results are often farcical!
    Issues are tossed in and out of your politicized federal courts.
    Federal courts are manned by politicians dressed up in black robes impersonating judges and they comes with a suffix of (R) or (D) . One can always find a judge who supports your own political views
    Greetings from your Swedish favorite troll (accustomed to democracy)

Comments are closed.