Judiciary Ruling Against Obama's Stem Cell Executive Order Right, But For The Wrong Reason

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Let me rephrase that. . . it was right, for the right reason, but not really completely the right reason.

In other words, Obama's executive orders overstep his authority in ways beyond what the courts say.

Okay, let's first understand the judge's angle.

A federal district judge has blocked President Obama’s 2009 executive order that expanded embryonic stem cell research because the judge believes it violated a ban on federal money being used to destroy embryos.

Right.

Besides, there is no Constitutional authority for the federal government to be funding anything along these lines, anyway.

Want the authority? Pass an amendment.

The ruling forces all work on stem cell research, or at least the work being funded by the federal government, to stop immediately.

The ruling specifically zeros in on the distinction between work that leads to the destruction of embryos, which cannot be financed by the federal government under current law.

But the concern over the executive order goes deeper. You see, Obama's executive order was an attempt to modify the law. But, Article I, Section 1 of the United States Constitution is very specific in that only the legislative branch has the authority to make law, adjust law, modify law, strike down law. . . in other words, "All legislative powers" belong to the legislative branch.

Neither the executive branch, nor the judicial branch for that matter, has the power to legislate. Therefore, Obama's modification of the law with an executive order is unconstitutional.

The judge kind of missed that part.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

U.S. Judge Rules Against Obama’s Stem Cell Policy - New York Times