3 ms·

According to [0] this is true. I'm surprised a president would need to use an EO for this? Couldn't they just command FAA to take a course of action? [0] https

According to [0] this is true. I'm surprised a president would need to use an EO for this? Couldn't they just command FAA to take a course of action? [0] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/13/boeing-shares-fall-after-report-says-us-expected-to-ground-737-max-fleet.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/13/boeing-shares-fall-after-rep...

jdavis703 8y ago
An EO is the legal mechanism to command an agency to take an action. Agencies shouldn’t be taking instructions from random tweets, TV appearances and speeches as it’s hard to interpret the exact meaning. Further if some random bureaucrat were to act on a random Tweet and then be sued they’d be unable to say “I was just following orders.”
- justin66 8y ago
  > An EO is the legal mechanism to command an agency to take an action. Agencies shouldn’t be taking instructions from random tweets, TV appearances and speeches as it’s hard to interpret the exact meaning. Yes, but it'd not be unusual for the agency's director to check in with the president on a course of action or vice versa, verbally or via memorandum, without the president formally invoking his presidential authority via executive order. To put the whole thing in perspective, the number of EOs issued annually by recent presidents Bush and Obama was very modest, averaging 36.4 and 34.6 respectively.