Executive Orders

In recent years, there has been a resurgence of interest in how executive orders have been used and whether there has been a violation of presidential executive orders. An executive order is a guideline from the president having the same jurisdiction as a federal statute. The president often issues executive orders, most of which are addressed to government departments and officials. Over the years, presidents have used executive orders to articulate with different government internal relations, as well as to deal with crises, determine when and how specific laws can be enacted, and come up with measures that suit their agendas. However, there have been reported cases of abuse of the executive orders by the presidents, and some are accused of taking advantage of this power to force some policies that do not fully interest the public. But are the executive orders constitutional? And do they create an unequal separation of power?

Any executive order has the full force of law if only it’s based on the authority consequent of the constitution or from the statute. In the constitution of the United States, no provision openly permits the practice of executive orders. Where the executive order is mentioned in the constitution, there is no clear explanation of what it should pertain. For any acting president, the executive order they develop must go in line with the constitution fails to which the president can face removal from office. The question of whether or to what extent should the executive orders be used to become unconstitutional always narrows to one’s opinion. Many feel that the executive orders that are currently being made by the sitting presidents are interfering with the freedoms and rights of the citizens.

Many argue that there should be a big difference between giving an executive order that is a directive and making law. The president has no authority to make legislation all in the name of an executive order. On their defense, the presidents say that some directives they make are because the Congress is too slow to work. For example, the gun ban that was to be effected some years back was an act against the constitution because such an issue should not be made and concluded by the executive only. On the other hand, however, an executive order that fully follows the dictate of the constitution is completely constitutional. When the president gives out the executive order, it has to pass the Congress depending on the magnitude and if the congress approves it means it has met the constitutional threshold to become effective.