3 ms·
Article didn't say why - could somebody provide a link that actually said what the problem(s) were?
by jleyank 4y ago
Article didn't say why - could somebody provide a link that actually said what the problem(s) were?
- hirundo 4y agoThe article says * The plaintiffs allege that they can show harm, and * the HEROES Act does not authorize the expenditure, therefore * "The Program is thus an unconstitutional exercise of Congress's legislative power and must be vacated." The ruling will be a variation of that explanation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_the_purse#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_of_the_purse#United_Stat...
- AnimalMuppet 4y agoWell, and that actually is what the constitution says. You want to spend all that money? Congress needs to pass it. You can't just do it by executive order. The first point, about showing harm, is basically about whether the plaintiffs have standing to sue. No harm, no legally recognized grounds for filing a lawsuit.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- rsj_hn 4y agoBecause spending money needs to be authorized by Congress through law. A president can't just issue an executive order and say "You don't need to pay this government guaranteed debt -- the taxpayers will pick up the tab. Because I said so." There have been several executive orders that were found unconstitutional: - Executive order that landlords can't evict tenants for non-payment of rent during covid - Several executive orders about vaccine mandates - Executive order imposing a moratorium on oil and gas leasing etc.