“Take Care That The Laws Be Faithfully Executed”

John Yoo, who knows a bit about the assertion of Executive Branch authority, says Obama has gone way beyond the normal lines with his unilateral immigration reform.

Under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, the president has the duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This provision was included to make sure that the president could not simply choose, as the British King had, to cancel legislation simply because he disagreed with it. President Obama cannot refuse to carry out a congressional statute simply because he thinks it advances the wrong policy. To do so violates the very core of his constitutional duties.

There are two exceptions, neither of which applies here. The first is that “the Laws” includes the Constitution. The president can and should refuse to execute congressional statutes that violate the Constitution, because the Constitution is the highest form of law. We in the Bush administration argued that the president could refuse to execute laws that infringed on the executive’s constitutional powers, particularly when it came to national security — otherwise, a Congress that had a different view of foreign policy could order the military to refuse to carry out the president’s orders as Commander-in-Chief, for example. When presidents such as Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, and FDR said that they would not enforce a law, they did so when the law violated their executive powers under the Constitution or the individual rights of citizens.

So far, so good.  But I love his examples of where Obama's road might lead:

But prosecutorial discretion is not being used in good faith here: A president cannot claim discretion honestly to say that he will not enforce an entire law — especially where, as here, the executive branch is enforcing the rest of immigration law.

Imagine the precedent this claim would create. President Romney could lower tax rates simply by saying he will not use enforcement resources to prosecute anyone who refuses to pay capital-gains tax. He could repeal Obamacare simply by refusing to fine or prosecute anyone who violates it.

So what we have here is a president who is refusing to carry out federal law simply because he disagrees with Congress’s policy choices. That is an exercise of executive power that even the most stalwart defenders of an energetic executive — not to mention the Framers — cannot support.

Random tax cuts... tempting!  OK, not really - I still think playing by the established rulle book makes mroe sense in the long run.

NIXONIAN!  If memory serves, Nixon attempted to implement a de facto line item veto by impounding funds appropriated by Congress and simply refusing to spend them.  That was overturned by something [an act of Congress upheld by a Federal Court and never taken to the Supremes] (NO, Ihave no idea why I am not Googling this, but I think the smell of breakfast is part of the explanation...)

Anyway, could  Congress earmark funds for enforcement of these specific imigration laws?  That is quite an intrusion on the Justice Dept, but Congress certainly does similar things with regard to, for example, closing military bases.

Just thinking out loud here...

And I should add - Obama's goal is to be seen as making the effort on behalf of Hispanics; an assertive Congress has many levers of power to block this, but at what net electoral cost or benefit?.

Comments

[Tom Maguire]

Pre-correction - I quote the Constitution in the title but the Constitution doesn't *really* capitalize each word. Sorry if that creates any confusion, LB.

[MarkO]

Purfuit of happineff?

[Extraneus]

Good comment, TM, but he wasn't able to distinguish between an executive order and an Executive Order, so I'm sure he won't mind.

[hit and run]

I'm scouring the post now for typos and grammar errors.

I eagerly await you having to be held account for them.

[Thomas Collins]

I agree with Yoo. However, I don't think it is appropriate for a federal court to intervene. Impeachment in the House and removal from office in the Senate would be quite appropriate (although I realize this is not going to happen in this situation). Congress should at least use the power of the purse (for example, by cutting off funding to implement this policy). I think the House should cut off funding and let Harry Reid explain why he won't let the Senate vote on the House bill.

[hit and run]

"rulle"

GOTCHA!

[MarkO]

"rulle"

A hidden reference to the lawlessness of John Edwards?

[narciso]

Why give him the benefit of the doubt;

http://weaselzippers.us/2012/06/15/catholic-hospitals-announces-they-cant-comply-with-obamacares-abortifacient-and-birth-control-mandate/

[bgates]

I think the House should cut off funding

They should defund the nonenforcement?

[sailor]

Well, I am glad that John Yoo has spoken up. Am a little disappointed in Mitt's acting a "little cautious," shall we say.

[AliceH]

Funds would be required to staff and equip the administrators handing out those 800,000 "temporary" work permits and for managing the every-2-year extensions, so yeah- defunding that be in order.

[AliceH]

*would* be

[Captain Hate]

(NO, i have no idea why I am not Googling this, but I think the smell of breakfast is part of the explanation...)

It's Fathers Day weekend; you should be able to do things on your schedule. At least theoretically...

[Captain Hate]

Am a little disappointed in Mitt's acting a "little cautious," shall we say.

Meh, this is all distraction and trying to keep attention away from the rotten economy and the JEF's pathetic speech on it.

[Thomas Collins]

Sailor, I think Mittster leaving Rubio to respond is a smart move. It is tough for Axelmessplouffe to demagogue Rubio's criticism of Obama's action. I think Mittster has to respond, but I see no rush.

[narciso]

This is what you're looking for TM;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Train_v._City_of_New_York

Also, the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Act of 1974.

[Thomas Collins]

Bgates, in addition to AliceH's example of what type of funding might be cut off, I think the House could actually cut off funding for nonenforcement. It would be in effect impeachment light. The House bill would contain a finding that Obama's action is a violation of the oath of office of the POTUS. It could then cut off funding for any official acting pursuant to the order, and for any administrative expenses implementing the order. Congress could also cut funding in other areas and hold up Obama appointments as a means of expressing its disapproval.

[narciso]

Btw, this took away whatever breaks there might have been for Congress to reign in in spending;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Impoundment_Control_Act_of_1974

[centralcal]

sailor, I think Obama and Axelplouffe were hoping to back Romney into a corner. I personally hope he is cautious and lets congresscritters take up the outcry.

[narciso]

They were perfectly willing to cut off military funds to the ARVN, other issues less so,

[hit and run]

TM:
“Take Care That The Laws Be Faithfully Executed”

Circus life
Under the big top world
We all need the clowns
To make us smile
Through space and time
Always another show

[Chubby]

((John Yoo, who knows a bit about the assertion of Executive Branch authority, says Obama has gone way beyond the normal lines with his unilateral immigration reform))

Exactly. It all boils down to the left having absolutely no respect for normal boundaries, in any department of life. We see that in the JOM trolls and we see it in the president.

[Rick Ballard]

There is absolutely no reason for Governor Romney to personally respond to every "look, squirrel" move by the Pinhead Troika. We're either two or nine days away from the Supreme smack down of the JEF's administration centerpiece and the campaign focus should be on the JEF's administration playing the Obamacare fiddle while the economy sank.

[Neo]

The Hispanic population ought to be a little wary of the President’s claims.

Since a Presidential Order doesn’t carry the same weight as a law .. and there is a law that says differently than the President, it’s quite possible that that this pandering to the illegal Hispanic community (who shouldn’t be voting because that is illegal no matter) could turn into the biggest group of patsies to turn themselves into ICE under the mistaken belief that the President can just ignore the laws that strike him unfavorably.

[Ignatz]

--We're either two or nine days away from the Supreme smack down of the JEF's administration centerpiece--

I take it Rick considers our lecherous leprechaun less than reliable.

[Ignatz]

Wouldn't that be hilarious Neo?
Unlikely, but hilarious.

[narciso]

Now as one recalls, the DHS doesn't have a great track record here;

http://ojihad.wordpress.com/2011/02/24/make-jihad-easy-for-me-saudi-student-of-texas-university-planned-terror-attack-in-us/

[Captain Hate]

Probably less than sentient.

[hit and run]

But duda has sources.

[Chubby]

I think yesterday was a big day in the Romney campaign and Obama used one of his old tricks and timed his announcement to steal from any thunder that Romney might get. I thought Romney handled it well, in that he didn't bite which is always the best thing to do when dealing with trolls and trolllike behavior.

[narciso]

It's actually a 'nudge, nudge' as the DHS rule states.

[Threadkiller]

Is this the thread where we decode the Constitution?

From Yoo:

"Under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution, the president has the duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This provision was included to make sure that the president could not simply choose, as the British King had, to cancel legislation simply because he disagreed with it."

I am sorry but this is completely erroneous. Everybody knows the Founding Fathers left a loophole to ensure our Commander in Chief could be loyal to the British Crown.

Didn't they?

[hit and run]

Obama would never round up illegals to deport them.

He'd send in drones to take them out, watching live video feeds of the carnage.

[Captain Hate]

TK aren't you supposed to be in indentured servitude to DoT until he completely recovers? Or did I just dream that...

[Danube of Thought]

There is a great deal to like about Romney's campaign so far. I think he's been very cagey, but at the same time statesmanlike.

On the other hand, I took two Percocets an hour ago. Not only am I happy, I am invincible.

[narciso]

So, having Janet Incompetano, the one that was surprised by AQAP's move, this will work out well,

[peter]

Minus 16 in the Ras

[Ignatz]

--I thought Romney handled it well--

I thought he did too. I just reread what he said over at Hotair and while he didn't rise to Barry's transparent baiting neither did he say nothing. He made the principled argument that it should be handled correctly via a law not a power grab.
Nicely split the difference between offending Hispanics, as the pinheads designed, and offending everyone else which was the other alternative.

[Captain Hate]

From a fellow moron with one small edit:

I heard a story on the NPR Weekend Edition about Romney's campaign bus tour this week. Here's the amazing part:

It was written from a Republican point of view. It was about what Romney hopes to achieve, and featured actual sound bites of him speaking. It did not have a single "critics charge" or even a quote from a Democrat operative.

[hit and run]

I had no idea. I mean I had seen the special packaging, but I didn't realize that my favortiest hobby in the world could actually be used to help veterans.

Illustrating Miller High Life's steadfast commitment to our country's veterans, the brand announced today the renewed partnership with Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA) and a new relationship with Operation Homefront to once again "Welcome Veterans Back to the High Life." For the third consecutive year, the iconic American brand is inviting legal-age beer drinkers to support veterans by helping provide them with thousands of memorable "High Life" experiences, such as tickets to professional sporting events and concerts, throughout the summer.

All I have to do is send tabs from my cans or caps from my bottles to retails or Miller itself, and each one puts ten cents toward the program.

At the pace I consume, I should be able to give at least 5 veterans some really nice experience. In fact, now I'm going to double my intake. For the cause.

I am troubled that I didn't realize this program had been going on for 3 years. How did I not know? How many tabs and caps have I simply put in the recycling bin or trash?

It's 11:17 am, and I am popping one open for the troops.

[pagar]

You or I or any decent American ignore laws we go to jail.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77486.html

"Obama’s policy strategy: Ignore laws"

Leftists just do whatever they please and nothing happens to them.

[Captain Hate]

All the patriotic ads in the world could not get me to drink Miller High Life.

[Janet]

Sorry to be a downer, but I believe Miller is also a sponsor of the Folsom St. "Fair" in San Francisco. High life indeed.

On the other hand, I took two Percocets an hour ago. Not only am I happy, I am invincible.

I've only had a fried egg & some tobacco so that might explain my sour disposition.

[Janet]

Leftists just do whatever they please and nothing happens to them.

I hear ya, pagar.

[Chubby]

video of Mitt's response LUN

(Real Clear Politics)

[Captain Hate]

I believe Miller is also a sponsor of the Folsom St. "Fair" in San Francisco.

Ugh; consult Zombietime for pictures of that little slice of Hell. Bring a barf bag.

[Jane]

Since a Presidential Order doesn’t carry the same weight as a law .. and there is a law that says differently than the President, it’s quite possible that that this pandering to the illegal Hispanic community (who shouldn’t be voting because that is illegal no matter) could turn into the biggest group of patsies to turn themselves into ICE under the mistaken belief that the President can just ignore the laws that strike him unfavorably.

We should all be spreading the rumor that this is precisely Obama's intent - because the black people are really upset about Latino's stealing their benefits.

First we need to turn it into a 40 character soundbite.

[Ignatz]

Bear in mind it's only mid June and Barry's already thrashing around like a bear with its foot in a trap.
Imagine what he'll get up to if by September the economy continues on its current tanking trajectory and he's trailing in the polls by ten instead of it being essentially a dead heat.
It ain't gonna be pretty.
Could be amusing though, in a Gawd-help-us-all sort of way.

[GMax]

Leftists just do whatever they please and nothing happens to them.

Au contraire, hide and watch, November is what happens to them and its going to be a holocaust but a well deserved and earned holocaust.

Now they will call my flight in a second so I am powering down. Keep your chins up, we got this one.

[hit and run]

Janet:
Sorry to be a downer, but I believe Miller is also a sponsor of the Folsom St. "Fair" in San Francisco.

I see a lot of stories from 2007, but nothing current. I see this from the Thomas More law center from Nov 2007 in which the Catholic League ended their boycott of Miller due to the Folsom participation.

So. Down is up!

CH:
All the patriotic ads in the world could not get me to drink Miller High Life.

Not to worry, I'll drink enough for the both of us. And Janet.

Janet:
I've only had a fried egg & some tobacco

Do you finely chop or coarsely crumble your tobacco when you put it on your egg? I prefer chopped.

[Jane]

The other issue that is nettling me is Obama's constant harping on "republican policies got us here" which is patently untrue. Fannie and Freddie a democrat policy thru and thru got us here. I wish ROmney would say so - and I wish he would link the decline to 6 years of democrat congressional rule.

[Captain Hate]

That's ok hit; I'll be getting together with my buds later with a growler full of Sierra Nevada Southern Hemisphere Harvest Fresh Hop Ale, assuming the local beverage store's tap hasn't run out.

[Chubby]

Jane,

YES! and I wish someone would loudly point out that Obama was into the affordable housing/ Fannie-Freddie scam up to his eyeballs

[Janet]

from the 2005 Folsom St. Fair -

"Veronica Kruschel, 2, drinks water while her twin sister Zola enjoys the Folsom Street Fair environment. Their parents Gary Beuschel and John Kruse (not photographed) watch nearby while having a lunch break."

Miller sponsored.

[hit and run]

I think I've mentioned before how I have the most non-discriminating palate in the history of the world. DrJ and I discussed this last year when I was out in SF (I should be a subject of a study somewhere!). It just doesn't make sense for me to drink anything but the cheapest beer, because I really don't taste a difference in terms of quality between piss water and the most finely crafted beer in the world.

I don't consider people who call what I drink bad to be beer snobs or anything -- I consider them to be normal, and myself abnormal.

I may wish it weren't so, but then I'd be spending a bunch more on beer, so . . . winning!

[Chubby]

but exposing young children to that is not child abuse, eh?

[hit and run]

Jane:
The other issue that is nettling me is Obama's constant harping on "republican policies got us here" which is patently untrue.

Here you go.

(just don't tell 'em it's highly . . . edited)

[Chubby]

my 11:45 was responding to the picture Janet posted

[Captain Hate]

That's fine, hit; far be it for me to tell anybody how to spend their money and life. That's what libs do.

[henry]

Hit, you have a future as a Florida prosecutor.

[DrJ]

I have the most non-discriminating palate in the history of the world.

Hit's right that we talked about this. We had a wonderful Italian dinner in North Beach (San Francisco). With dinner I ordered a very good Seghesio Zin (what else?) and that prompted the discussion.

I love these, and hit claimed that he was not able to gauge how good it was or wasn't. Yes, he claimed tell the difference between beverages, but for him he claimed he could tell no difference in perceived quality.

To say that I was surprised was an understatement. It's just contrary to my taste buds.

I should mention that hit, ever the gentleman, picked up the tab. I'm sure I appeared on his expense report as a high powered consultant or some such.

[sailor]

Well, TC, I hope Mitt will respond as to letting Congress decide about whether or not unconstitutional. And, also, cc, Do you think Congress will take up the outcry?

[hit and run]

DrJ:
I should mention that hit, ever the gentleman, picked up the tab. I'm sure I appeared on his expense report as a high powered consultant or some such.

Heh! I filed that expense report late. And once I did, my boss returned it to me saying I had to indicate with whom I had dinner. It wasn't a real inquiry, it was a box checking exercise. I think I put "team dinner" and no one said another word.

[Captain Hate]

While we're dishing out compliments, jimmyk treated me to some delicious tastes of Belgium from out of the tap around Christmas.

[DrJ]

"team dinner"

Yay! I'm part of the team! Doesn't a tee shirt or hat come with that? Or a pay check?

:)

[Extraneus]

AP: Supreme Court's decision on Obama's health care law unlikely to be the last word

WASHINGTON – Some are already anticipating the Supreme Court's ruling on President Barack Obama's health care law as the "decision of the century." But the justices are unlikely to have the last word on America's tangled efforts to address health care woes. The problems of high medical costs, widespread waste, and tens of millions of people without insurance will require Congress and the president to keep looking for answers, whether or not the Affordable Care Act passes the test of constitutionality.

What? Even if it's upheld?

[Captain Hate]

The problems of high medical costs, widespread waste, and tens of millions of people without insurance will require Congress and the president to keep looking for answers, whether or not the Affordable Care Act passes the test of constitutionality.

The AP path to serfdom.

[Porchlight]

What? Even if it's upheld?

It's almost as if they know something we don't, Extraneus.

[Jane]

Hit, you have a future as a Florida prosecutor.

LOL Henry. SOrry I read your post wrong last night. Caro forced me to drink vodka - that's my excuse.

[narciso]

Actually, they haven't for the longest time,

[henry]

Ah, Caro did it. : ) I'm just keeping my gloat skills honed for whatever happens in the recount here -- at the least the local MSM has to cover voter fraud for the next two weeks!

[Paula]

Can anyone explain to me how this differs from when GH Bush stopped sending home Chinese nationals after the Tiananmen Square crackdown?

Or how it differs from when GWB signed an executive order allowing people in the country illegally to gain a legal right to be in the country?

Just trying to understand this...

[matt]

Hit;

I may be wrong, but I recall that IAVA was founded as a liberal alternative to the VFW and Legion. I don't pay attention to most of that stuff and it was several years ago, but it struck me as a Madison Avenue, politically correct association. Haven't heard much about them through the usual channels.

[hit and run]

Thanks, matt. I might should look at it more closely. I hope that by sending in my tabs and caps -- from beers I will drink either way -- will help in some small way. But if it's more harmful than helpful in the sense that it supports liberal causes as much or more than military ones, that would be a bother.

[narciso]

Yes, you can pop the tops, but take care;

http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=25795

[BR]

Narciso, your earlier link to the Sipsey Street Irregulars and Codrea's upcoming radio show on Sunday night is amazing about ICE agent Zapata killed while investigating Fast and Furious!

I actually thought that might have been the case with Brian Terry, since he was shot in the back.

[Clarice]

Cut off the fundng for AF1 and 2 unless they rescind this order.

[Ignatz]

--Can anyone explain to me how this differs from when GH Bush stopped sending home Chinese nationals after the Tiananmen Square crackdown?--

There are provisions for political oppression and as Barry helpfully pointed out the people covered by his latest action do not fall into that category.

As to your claim about W Bush do you have a citation?
Here's a list to help you. I'm not saying it isn't in there but you made the assertion so help me to understand. If he did do it, it is no different and should also be condemned. Let's see if he did first. Your turn.

[narciso]

Clarice, I was kind of surprised that the Pakula revelations, re Holland, haven't made a greater impact, it seems like the Libby case
all over again,

[Paula]

Thanks so much, Iggy! Someone else made the assertion about GWB's executive order. I couldn't imagine he doing that w/o a huge outcry against it.

[Paula]

What I meant to say was that someone made that assertion to me and I tried to look for it, but couldn't find it. I figured someone here would know whether he did or not. Thanks again.

[Jane]

Henry,

I very much look forward to the recall and your analysis. Caro and I were saying today how glad we are you emerged this year.

[Ignatz]

--Thanks so much, Iggy! Someone else made the assertion about GWB's executive order. I couldn't imagine he doing that w/o a huge outcry against it.--

Yeah, I wasn't going to look through all those EOs especially since about half of them didn't have a title.
Sorry if I misunderstood whose assertion it was. :)

[Paula]

Iggy, this is the EO they were looking at...July 3 2002 Expedited Naturalization Executive Order and Nov 15 2002 Executive Order Regarding Undocumented Aliens in the Caribbean Region.

[daddy]

Hit,

Thanks for the hard work digging up that clip of racist Bill Plante hollering at our Post Racial President. Fine, fine job Sir!

[Ignatz]

--Iggy, this is the EO they were looking at...July 3 2002 Expedited Naturalization Executive Order and Nov 15 2002 Executive Order Regarding Undocumented Aliens in the Caribbean Region.--

Thanks for digging through those,Paula.
The July 3rd one says nothing about illegal aliens and since it refers to expedited naturalization it's hard to see how it could have. In any event it is as a reward for voluntarily serving in the armed forces not for involuntarily being born here.
The Nov one was in relation to the political and humanitarian problems associated with the further disintegration of what seemed like an already thoroughly disintegrated Haiti and the boat people and refugees coming from that benighted hellhole.

[Paula]

Thanks so much, Iggy! XOX

So IOW, neither one can compare w/ what BO just did by declaring he wouldn't enforce the law of the land, right?

[Jane]

It just occurred to me how desperate Obama is coming across. I find that fabulous!

[Kathy Kattenburg]

"John Yoo, who knows a bit about the assertion of Executive Branch authority, says Obama has gone way beyond the normal lines with his unilateral immigration reform."

John Yoo's knowledge about the assertion of Executive Authority certainly should not lead him to the conclusion that an Executive Order stating that the U.S. government will not deport individuals who have been in the U.S. since childhood and have no criminal record "goes way beyond the normal lines" of unilateral actions the POTUS can take based on his executive authority alone.

It may or may not be true that Obama has exceeded his executive authority, but John Yoo would certainly not be a logical person to assert that, if he is basing his assertion on what his knowledge of executive authority led him to state that the POTUS had the authority to do on his own, w/o congressional approval or oversight.

I'm surprised you would say otherwise, because this is really not factual, based on the nature of what Pres. Obama did with regard to immigration policy versus the nature of what John Yoo authorized Pres. Bush to do. That's really not open to reasonable dispute.

[Ignatz]

Kathy, in your short absence from JOM's placid shores have you completed an advanced course in incoherence?
You were quite adept previously but you would appear to be ready for a dissertation at this point.
We've been needing a true scholar in this area of expertise ever since Professor Erwin Corey went to his reward. Kudos, doc.

[Sara]

DOT: Be careful with that Percoset. The first time I was given it, Navy Hospital SD in '72, I had hallucinations of being wheeled down the hospital corridor while all the other patients stood in their room doorways and threw forks under the tires of my gurney to try and give it a flat tire.

[hit and run]

That's really not open to reasonable dispute.

I have to concede: you're the expert par excellence in unreasonable dispute.

[Tom Roberts]

Anyway, could Congress earmark funds for enforcement of these specific imigration laws? That is quite an intrusion on the Justice Dept, but Congress certainly does similar things with regard to, for example, closing military bases...

Appropriations and authorization bills are organized by line items, some of which are for general items like paying everybody in an agency and some of which are for particular activities like buying F35s or military construction at various bases.
Now what a PO'd congress can do is to specifically defund a line item, with 'prejudicial language' preventing any spare funding from being redirected to pay the bills in that area,
or
they can put in a line item to do something specific. Most of the DoD Procurement and R&D budgets are this type of thing, where Congress says the Exec is going to buy so many items next year.

Now this type of thing doesn't prevent the agencies from failing to carry out Congressional intent by bungling the procurements and activities (e.g. TSA harrassing old folks) or by creatively moving activities into other line items (e.g. MDA pushing various missile defense programs into various other line items), but doing that generally causes Congress staffers next year to cut or plus up the applicable line items vindictively.

[Strawman Cometh]

based on the nature of what Pres. Obama did with regard to immigration policy versus the nature of what John Yoo authorized Pres. Bush to do.
John Yoo didn't authorize Pres. Bush to do anything. But he did point out that the Constitution grants the CiC, once given Congressional authorization, a free hand to conduct the business of war. The Constitution grants no such authority to the President in matters of immigration.

[Donald]

I have obviously had the wrong percocets in the past!

Just sayin.

Did my first 50 mile bike ride today. Topped it off with catching 0 trout.

Not a bad day.

[sbwaters]

Gosh, Kathy, thanks for your unsubstantiated assertions. If it weren't for them, I wouldn't know who to follow blindly.

[Jane]

Holy cow Donald. That certainly deserves some applause. Nice job!

[hit and run]

I caught 0 trout today as well.

[Kathy Kattenburg]

"John Yoo didn't authorize Pres. Bush to do anything. But he did point out that the Constitution grants the CiC, once given Congressional authorization, a free hand to conduct the business of war. The Constitution grants no such authority to the President in matters of immigration."

He didn't "point it out" -- that suggests drawing someone's attention to an already existing reality. He asserted that the Constitution gives the President the authority to do anything he wanted if he decides it's related to war or national security. In fact, the AUMF does not constitute permanent authorization for any President to do anything he wants if he decides it's related to war or national security. And the Constitution does not say that Congress can authorize the chief executive to do anything he wants regarding war or national security from that point on, indefinitely. The Constitution does not say that, anywhere. John Yoo asserted that it did, but a lot of other people besides John Yoo have the ability to read, and the Constitution does not say anything like that.

I'm just pointing out that, in point of fact, John Yoo pointed out nothing; rather, he asserted something that was not true.

[Kathy Kattenburg]

"If it weren't for them, I wouldn't know who to follow blindly."

Well, you appear to have no problem following unsubstantiated assertions blindly when they come from someone whose politics you agree with.