# data[].attributes.headline
Power To Represent Our nation in other countries

# data[].attributes.subject
Power To Represent Our nation in other countries

# data[].attributes.body
-Has broad powers to manage national affairs and the priorities of the government.
-Can issue rules, regulations, and instructions called executive orders, which have the binding force of law upon federal agencies but do not require approval of the United States

# data[].attributes.body
-Gives the executive branch and the President, not Congress, the power to appoint federal officials.
-The President has the power to appoint federal judges, ambassadors, and other "principal officers” of the United States, subject to Senate confirmation of such appointments.

# data[].attributes.body
-Has the power to call into service the state units of the National Guard, and in times of emergency may be given the power by Congress to manage national security or the economy.

-Can send troops into war without official declaration.

# data[].attributes.body
-Serves as the nation's principal political leader and regarded as the leader of his political party.
- The president's skills in that task influence the success of the president's party in electing members of Congress and holders of state and local offices.

# data[].attributes.headline
Power To Act as a Commander In Chief During War

# data[].attributes.subject
Power To Act as a Commander In Chief During War

# data[].attributes.body
-The president is the Commander in Chief of the U.S. Army, Navy, and Air Force.
-An officer in command of a particular portion of an armed force who has been given this title by specific authorization.

# data[].attributes.body
-Included in a number of amendments to the United States Constitution
-Used, with slight variations, in Amendments XIII, XIV, XV, XIX, XXIII, XXIV, and XXVI.

# data[].attributes.body
-The pardon power for federal crimes is granted to the President of the United States under Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution -States that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A recent item in the news that caught my attention was the controversy concerning President Obama's decision to use an executive order to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants in the United States. Given the amount of controversy surrounding this decision, it can be easy to see why some may be flustered by President Obama's executive order.

The details of the order are fairly clear. Under the order, immigrants who are here are essentially allowed to stay in America. Their children are eligible for federal retirement benefits if they are under 30, but the parents are not. There are some bureaucratic catches with the system, such as having to reapply every 3-5 years, but that is the gist of what the order does.

This article's job is not to talk about the legality of such an action. Others have done so. This article's job is to talk about whether President Obama has the authority to enact such a piece of legislation.

In short, he does.

The office of the president has always had broad powers concerning executive action. In general, unless the Constitution explicitly bars the president from doing something, it can be argued that the president can make changes to that law.

So unless the Constitution directly says: The President of the United States cannot, under any cause, make sweeping changes to the immigration laws of the United States; President Obama, like every other president before him, most certainly has the authority to enact such legislation.

Apparently, America has always been fine with presidents asserting their executive power during times of war. Franklin Delano Roosevelt instigated the War Powers Acts which gave him increased Executive authority directly after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Incidentally, FDR is also the president with the most executive orders under his name. Luckily, this bring the conversation to an important question concerning the ethics of President Obama's executive action.

During Bill Clinton's presidency, he issued a total of 363 executive orders. President Bush (Jr.) issued 290 executive orders during his 2 term presidency. One important factor in all of these presidencies, including Obama's current term is that all three of these men won reelection, meaning that Clinton, Bush, and Obama did/will serve for 8 years.

Compared to the previous 2 presidents, Obama has issued the fewest executive actions, totaling in at only 190 executive orders since he took office in 2008. So the argument that conservatives flock to, that Obama cares not for the Constitution and is Dictator Obama or Fuher Obama is simply ridiculous. If anything, President Obama uses the executive powers of his office far less than other modern presidents did during their terms. It is worth noting that Obama still has two years left until he leaves office in 2016, so he may still surpass Bash in numbers of orders issued. However, that is not the case right now.

It is not my aim to pretend that this ruling doesn't come with a certain sense of politicking. I'd argue it most certainly does. Along with Obamacare, or the Affordable Care Act, this is probably President Obama's most emphatic statement concerning his own presidential legacy to date. The Democrats almost always fare better with all minority voters than Republicans do.

Democrats often receive a bigger chunk of the Hispanic vote, the black vote, the female vote, and the young vote. In many cases, it is not a stretch to say the only group the Republican party gets in overwhelming numbers is the middle aged/old white male vote. To be certain, President Obama's recent decision concerning immigration is both an act of social justice and political victory.

The biggest mistake made thus far in this discussion is that the questions that have been asked about the executive order do not get at the heart of the question at hand. Instead of arguing semantics as to whether Obama has the authority to do this, we should be asking what good or bad will come from this executive order. And for that answer, only time will tell.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A recent item in the news that caught my attention was the controversy concerning President Obama's decision to use an executive order to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants in the United States. Given the amount of controversy surrounding this decision, it can be easy to see why some may be flustered by President Obama's executive order.

# data[].attributes.body
-Obama wrote in a message to Congress. “The President also has the prerogative to obtain advice that will assist him in carrying out his constitutional responsibilities
- Congress cannot canoot constitutionally defund the position in protest of what it sees as a workaround of the Senate’s advise and consent power.

# data[].attributes.body
-Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President the power “to make Treaties".
-the Supremacy Clause provides that “treaties,” like statutes, count as “the supreme law of the land. "

# data[].attributes.body
-This veto can be overridden only by a two-thirds vote in both the Senate and the House. If this occurs, the bill becomes law over the President's objections.
- A pocket veto occurs when Congress adjourns during the ten-day period. The President cannot return the bill to Congress.