The hottest Executive Power Substack posts right now

And their main takeaways
Category
Top U.S. Politics Topics

You down with OLC?

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 12 Jan 12
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. The Office of Legal Counsel released an opinion about recess appointments, arguing that recent ones were made during a valid recess. They believe this argument is important for transparency.
  2. OLC opinions are more like legal arguments rather than binding court rulings, meaning they aren't laws. Different interpretations exist, which could lead to future conflicts or legal challenges.
  3. Political players, including the President and Congress, are engaging in strategic maneuvers over recess appointments. This could damage established norms and affect how politics is conducted in the future.

Recess appointments: watch what you cite...

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 09 Jan 12
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. Recess appointments can be confusing because the Constitution is not clear on them. Different people can have different opinions about whether they're legal or not.
  2. Debate about recess appointments is important for democracy. Hearing various viewpoints helps everyone understand the issues better.
  3. Opinions from the Justice Department about recess appointments shouldn't be seen as the final word. They are mainly arguments that support the executive branch and can be challenged by others.

Recess Redux

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 06 Jan 12
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. Recess appointments raise complex questions. They involve legal, ethical, and political issues that often don't connect neatly with each other.
  2. The conflict between what is allowed constitutionally and what seems right normatively creates challenges in how appointments should be handled.
  3. Current political actions could lead to changes in how power is shared between the presidency and Congress. This might make future appointments more contentious.

In Which A Whig Thinks About Recess Appointments

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 04 Jan 12
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. There are two key ideas at odds when it comes to government appointments: keeping Congress involved in appointments and ensuring that the government runs smoothly even when Congress is out of session. Both are important for a functioning democracy.
  2. The way Congress operates today is very different from when the Constitution was written. Shorter breaks and more frequent sessions mean that the need for recess appointments isn't as pressing as it once was.
  3. There's still confusion about what exactly counts as a 'recess' for making appointments. Different interpretations can lead to a lot of disagreement and may shift power between the presidency and Congress.

Whigging out

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 30 Nov 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. Congress has the power to shape its own support systems, like the Congressional Budget Office, but if they weaken these tools, they risk giving more power to the President.
  2. It’s tough for Congress to challenge the President directly because the President has a unified message and strong public support, making it hard for Congress to counter effectively.
  3. Congress can either centralize power to act more decisively or expand its capacity to gather information, but these approaches often conflict and can create internal tensions within the legislature.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:

More on Perry's Plan: A Whig Perspective

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 16 Nov 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. Rick Perry's plan may weaken Congress and enhance the President's power. This could lead to a more politicized judiciary and shift more influence to the executive branch.
  2. Reducing congressional staff but not staff in the Executive Office of the President could create an imbalance of information and power. This means the President might have an advantage in legislative discussions.
  3. Cutting staff could hurt Congress's ability to properly oversee the executive branch. This is important because effective oversight helps keep power in check and ensures the government serves the people.

Ten years burning down the road

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 26 Oct 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. The Patriot Act has become normal to many people, making it easy for society to overlook its implications for personal freedom and privacy. Most citizens don’t see how it impacts their lives until a specific incident brings it to light.
  2. The sunset clauses in the Patriot Act allow Congress to limit executive power, which is a crucial step to avoid handing over unchecked authority. Regularly reviewing and renewing powers could keep the balance between safety and liberty in check.
  3. There's a concern that administrations, like Obama’s, have made enhanced security measures a standard practice, similar to how Eisenhower accepted the New Deal. This acceptance can make it harder to roll back such policies in the future.

Executive sidestepping

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 24 Oct 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. The president has to follow legal authority and can't act like a king. His power comes from the Constitution or laws made by Congress, so saying he's sidestepping Congress isn't really correct.
  2. Executive power in domestic policy mostly comes from Congress giving it to the president. This means he can't make decisions that go against what Congress has already decided without specific permission.
  3. Congress can take back powers it has given to the president whenever it wants. If lawmakers don’t like what the president is doing, they can change the laws to restrict his authority.

More on the anti-empire amendment

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 10 Jun 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. Limiting military deployment without a declaration of war can reduce the chances of entering unnecessary conflicts. This means fewer soldiers would be put at risk without Congress's approval.
  2. If Congress declares war, it gives the President more power, but if no declaration exists and military action is taken, the President loses some legislative influence. This balances the powers between Congress and the President.
  3. The proposed amendment aims to discourage both Congress and the President from engaging in military actions lightly, promoting accountability and encouraging the end of wars when necessary.

If you like it so much, you defend it

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 24 Feb 11
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. It's okay for a president to not defend a law they think is unconstitutional. It doesn't mean they're ignoring it, just that they don't want to fight for it in court.
  2. Not enforcing a law is very different from not defending it legally. Not enforcing can lead to big problems, but not defending doesn't change how the law is followed.
  3. If the government believes a law is unconstitutional, it might be better for supporters of that law to find different lawyers to defend it, as the government might not do a good job of it.

Executive Power: A quick note from the Kagan hearing

Matt’s Five Points • 0 implied HN points • 29 Jun 10
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. The Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) is very vague and does not provide clear guidance on presidential power, making it problematic to rely on for decision-making.
  2. The Youngstown test divides presidential power into three categories, but using the AUMF as proof of Congress's authorization raises questions about its true validity and support.
  3. To strengthen Congress's control over presidential powers, it's suggested to have all presidential powers expire at the end of each Congress, so they can be re-evaluated and voted on anew.

The Military As A Murder Weapon

The Weekly Dish • 0 implied HN points • 05 Dec 25
🇺🇸 U.S. Politics Executive Power
  1. A strong leader can use the military as a murder weapon by ordering strikes without wider approval.
  2. There may be no congressional vote or legal defense when that happens, so checks and balances can be bypassed.
  3. Missiles in the hands of a reckless leader pose a grave danger to civilians and democracy, so institutions and oversight must be protected.