Comments: Obama Surrenders U.S. Sovereignty

You know, I hyperventilated about this on a number of online forums, but then it occurred to me that an EO doesn't have the force of law and certainly not the standing of the U.S. Constitution. While international relations is the purview of the Executive Branch, in the event of criminal proceedings against a U.S. citizen, the Judiciary would throw this out in a heartbeat.

I think the greater concern was identified by Andy McCarthy. Since INTERPOL's U.S. headquarters is inside the DOJ in D.C. - "Why is it suddenly necessary to have, within the Justice Department, a repository for stashing government files which, therefore, will be beyond the ability of Congress, American law-enforcement, the media, and the American people to scrutinize?"

Posted by diogenes online at December 28, 2009 08:52 AM

From its beginning, Interpol was merely a way for police forces to exchange information. When did it get enforcement powers of its own and what were the reasons?

Posted by Bleepless at December 28, 2009 05:41 PM

then it occurred to me that an EO doesn't have the force of law and certainly not the standing of the U.S. Constitution.

The original WWII vintage legislation being modified by Reagan's EO and now Obama's, explicitly framed up a list of restrictions and possible tax liabilities, and explicitly stated that the president would have authority via EO to add/delete these for an organization as they pleased.

So the original FDR WWII era legislation was explicitly written to allow modification by EO.

Posted by Purple Avenger at December 29, 2009 01:45 AM

So the original FDR WWII era legislation was explicitly written to allow modification by EO.

Even so, it is still subordinate to the Constitution...

Posted by diogenes online at December 29, 2009 07:57 AM