GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, OR DO THEY?

[Blindgreed1]

Almost all use of Executive Order/Action draws the ire of the opposition party, people who disagree with what's being enacted, and people who dislike the President. And, there are those who decry all EOs/EAs as unconstitutional regardless of content or party or President. It's been that way for hundreds of years.

As posted upthread, the thousands of EO/EAs issued cover laws and policies across a multitude of topics; some more controversial than others. Lincoln's "Emancipation Proclamation" is one well-known Executive Order. Harry Truman used EO to desegregate schools. Franklin Roosevelt used EO to forbid banks from releasing gold coin or bullion; Executive Order 6102 forbade the hoarding of gold coin, bullion and gold certificates. George W. Bush used EO to restrict public access to the papers of former presidents. Bill Clinton used EOs to for environmental protection purposes. Etc...

Nothing in the Constitution says, "Executive Order or Executive Action", which fundamentalists often use to claim that EOs/EAs are therefore unlawful. But, the term 'executive power' used in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, refers to the title of President as the "executive". As so, he/she is instructed to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" per Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Since all EO/EAs require a Constitutional justification, those two sections of the document are typically cited as justification.

Obama's Gun Violence Reduction EA is not a controversial one in terms of content, in my opinion. It's giving a broader scope of duties to government agencies in order for them to enforce existing laws as intended. The ATF will get more budget and staffing to ensure that gun dealers can't get around the licensing requirements and they'll get updated criteria for what constitutes a dealer to help close loopholes; they'll also get additional funding to enhance the National Ballistics database to better track illegal gun trafficking. That means more legal dealers, more background checks on potential buyers, more power and resources to pursue unlicensed/illegal dealers. The FBI will get more staff to run the anticipated higher volume of background checks, and do it more quickly so fewer people will get guns without a background check because the FBI wasn't able to complete it within the committed 3-day time frame.

Funding for smart gun technology research and mental health is also part of the 10 point EA. I think those points may need to go through Congress for approval though; we'll find out more details at the televised Town Hall Meeting tonight.

Personally, I doubt that any Republican politician will seriously challenge this EA with the Supreme Court, even if they are declaring now that they will (though some pro-gun groups or individuals might). I think such a challenge would fail with any set of Supreme Court Justices and it would be politically imprudent for any elected politician, almost all of whom have said they support universal background checks and more mental health focus, to challenge measures designed to curb gun violence. But, they have the right and the opportunity to challenge it if they want and a few EOs have been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and overturned over the years.

Very few. This probably won't be overturned as none of it will come to fruition over the coming months.