What is the power to legislate without the power to oversee the execution of the law?
I did. The check is the purse. There is no âbalanceâ with oversight.
3 Likes
Legislating.
Important distinction.
1 Like
Says who? If you reject âedicts of ephorsâ, who is going to set that boundary?
The Constitution. Itâs been set since 1789.
1 Like
If Congress has âoversightâ of the executive, how is that âseparate but equalâ?
3 Likes
Right. âAll legislative powersâ. Thatâs it. With such a broad and vague term, how are we going to set limits without âedicts from ephorsâ.
Of course there is. How can Congress craft laws without the ability to inform themselves of what laws are needed?
Now youâre moving the gosl posts. Investigating the executive is not researching which laws are needed.
Over is the key word in oversight.
But hereâs a thought, how about Congress listens to the constituents?
3 Likes
Of course it is.
There is a fundemental separation between the creation of law, and the execution of them. If the Executive is interpreting and executing a law in a way that Congress did not intend, Congress must have the power to investigate to determine how the law should be changed - otherwise the power to create law is meaningless.
No. That is weak and you know it. There is no âoversightâ in separate but equal branches.
1 Like
Again, of course there is. You are pedantically focused on the âoverâ half of the word, and ignoring the âsightâ part.
Congress does not have the power to instruct the Executive on how to execute the law, outside of the text of the law itself - but they definitely do have the power to see how the law is executed.
âOverâ is first. They are not âseeingâ how the law is executed, they think, as you do, they are âoverâ the executive.
What law are they seeing to with the 1/6 investigation.
1 Like
You must have been really mad at the Benghazi investigations.
I donât remember that though.
Sure, the only purpose that served was to keep Hildawg out.
I donât remember you arguing they were unconstitutional.
This is an emotional argument. It does not matter what you imagine Congress âthinksâ - nor does it matter what you imagine I think. This is a very well-settled aspect of the separation of powers.
They are seeing to the administration of Congress itself.
It is interesting that your issue of contention is with legislative oversight of the executive, since in this instance, the executive is barely involved at all.
Yes, Kev told us that.
Fun fact: âseparate but equalâ doesnât appear in The Constitution. I thought such a strict textualist such as yourself might find that interesting.
Furthermore, since the American president is the most powerful man in the nation, if not the world, I should think youâd welcome oversight on such a powerful position.
But obviously, such power shouldnât be absolute. This is where your âedicts from ephorsâ come into play. They are the only tool we have to check such power. Vague theories an protestations on the internet certainly wonât cut it.
