Skip to content

Executive Orders

by on September 8, 2010

Lynn Harsh (aptly named), Chief Executive Officer (of something), issued a press release regarding a lawsuit filed in Washington State, against governor Gregoire.  Since Harsh didn’t use any legal arguments in her points, and didn’t cite any sources, I’m going to do the same.  What you read, the, is a moral argument, based from the opposite side of the spectrum from that of Harsh.  However, it may benefit you to read some of the original article to understand my points and contentions.

Executive orders have no holding in law; they are an order issued by an executive that have the full force of that governing executive’s ability to persuade others to follow the order (free the slaves!; intern the Japanese!; torture at Guantanamo!).  Although executive orders have no legal holding, they are orders, and are generally followed.  Gregoire didn’t circumvent the legal process by issuing an executive order; she did so after failed legislation and used her own executive powers as governor.  She does have the right to issue an order; whether the order is right is the point, and I won’t resolve that.

An executive order has nothing to do with “no taxation without representation.”  Gregoire is a governor, also known as an elected representative of the people.  Moreover, the governor is charged with ensuring the health, welfare, and morals of a state.  To do so, an executive order is sometimes necessary.

From → Politics, US Politics

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: