Why is Obama getting away with refusing to uphold the law?

July 12, 2012

By Nancy Thorner and Jane Keill –

With extreme frustration over the silence of our individual Washington legislators and those in the mainstream media who give short shrift to our concerns, it seemed necessary to tally up our thoughts about Obama’s seizure of authority and the creation of a White House throne. This commentary draws together what we see to be major breaches of law that Obama has committed in recent years.

Many of the players (36%) in Congress are likewise lawyers. They know what is legal and not legal. For the good of the American people, might it be better if there were not so many trained lawyers in Congress who are prone to set forth a surplus of unnecessary laws and verbiage to confound and confuse the public?

For months we watched with trepidation as Obama broke laws or ignored them, with hardly a word about his gross infractions in local newspapers or on the major news media.  Internet resources offered the few exceptions where occasional information was posted: Drudge Report, Free Republic, Lucianne, NewsMax and one or two other Internet outlets.

Each of the following points we chose to explore deserve a fuller commentary. If you are so inclined, however, the links provided will give you more insight into those infringements of authority exhibited by Obama that the public cannot allow to be forgotten. Even our somewhat limited analysis will  fulfill the objective of showing that this President has made himself a Ruler, a Dictator, A King and a Lawbreaker and no one is stopping him. What follows are our ‘civilian’ thoughts on the issues, with links for further clarification.

1. Recess appointments: In January, 2012, Obama named Richard Cordray to the Consumer Federal Protection Bureau (CFPB). This bureau is an offshoot of the Dodd-Frank financial bill. The CFPB is assigned to the Treasury Department and does not report to Congress nor does Congress have any oversight on its activities. At the same time, Obama named 3 new members to the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board). These actions were done as recess appointments which are only legally made when Congress is not in session. 

Twelve phone calls were made to inquire about the legality of the recess appointments: 6 to the House of Representatives; 6 to the Senate; both Republican and Democrat legislators. All of the Republicans said immediately they were in ‘pro forma’ session. All of the Democrats said they were not in session until they were asked if they were in ‘pro forma’ session. Then, they all said yes.

The definition of recess appointments in the U.S. Constitution can be found in Article 1, Section 5 and Article 2, Section 2. Obama breached the Constitution because Congress was still in session when he made the above recess appointments.

2. Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA): In February, 2011, Obama instructed Eric Holder, Attorney General of the US, to no longer defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (enacted in September, 1996 as a Federal law). Obama does not have the authority to determine if a law is constitutional or not, nor does he have the authority to refuse to enforce the law.

3. First Amendment – religious freedom: In August, 2011, Obama announced through Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) that contraceptives, abortifacients, breast pumps, domestic violence counseling and other similar services would be covered – free – for all women, regardless of who provides it. This included religious organizations that own or support hospitals, clinics, schools, charities and adoption agencies.

In response to the strong objections of the Catholic Church and other religious organizations over his running roughshod over the First Amendment, Freedom of Religion right, Obama said he would compromise and only the insurance companies would have to offer the benefit. Many religious agencies, however, are self-insured so their insurance coverages are paid for by the church itself. In this case, the Catholic Church is suing Obama – one of the few who have taken an active step to fight this President. Obama swore in his oath of office to uphold the Constitution and he is blatantly breaching it here.

4. Dreamers Immigration: In July, 2011, Obama told the National Council of La Raza, “I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own… The idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. But that’s not how — that’s not how our system works.”

Then, in June 2012, Obama ordered Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security, to stop deporting ‘children’ (up to age 30) who were brought to the US illegally by their parents. The ‘children’ would be provided work papers and there are approximately 1,500,000 people in this category. There are other factors involved, but since Obama hasn’t done anything with the illegal immigration problem for 3 ½ years, one can only surmise that he’s ‘buying’ the Hispanic vote now that it is election time, a cynically obvious ploy. As he himself stated above, Obama does not have the authority to change the Federal immigration law.

5. Fast & Furious: A gun running project which began in 2009 and ended in 2011. Thousands of guns were sold and sent across the Mexican border without tracking tags and ended in the deaths of hundreds of Mexican citizens and Brian Terry, an American Border Patrol agent. The House Oversight committee of Congress has been investigating this issue since last year and has held Eric Holder, the Attorney General in contempt of Congress. Because of this contempt citation, Obama has invoked executive privilege so that certain additional papers and information will not be turned over to the committee. Using an earlier gun running project done under the Bush administration (Wide Receiver), the Obama administration has claimed they are just doing a similar project.  Operation “Wide Receiver” that the Bush administration ran was not the same as Obama’s “Fast and Furious”, and was ended in 2007.

If nothing was wrong with “Fast and Furious” because it was like the Bush program, then why the need to invoke executive privilege? On the other hand, if there was something wrong with “Fast and Furious”, then the Bush program can’t be used to excuse it.

What are Obama and Holder hiding?  Fast and Furious is an outrageous breach of the law, and Obama and Holder appear to be covering up its details. 

What concerns us most is that there are rarely any objections from our elected representatives in Washington, DC, over the President’s flouting of this country’s laws and Constitution. President Obama is using his executive powers in ways that are constitutionally questionable, thereby setting a dangerous precedent.

Because Obama’s power grabs are designed to set forth his ideological goals, he “throws to the wind” any notion that his unprecedented actions might be violating his oath of office.

November can’t come soon enough, bringing with it an election on November 6th. This is not the time to sit back fretting about what will befall this nation should Obama be elected to a second term. These times call for direct action from all of us. Phone calls are definitely in order to your Senators and Representatives and take little time and effort on your part. 


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s