1. EOs are not "law" in the sense that a statute is law. But it is law for executive branch employees. An EO is an order to all executive branch employees from the CEO of the Executive branch. Is it law for you and me? Well, no and yes. No, an EO is not addressed to me, so I can't violate it. And no, it is not addressed to me, so it can't be enforced against me. But, if I'm going to have any dealing with an executive branch employee, then the EO affects my life because it binds that employee. And since the tentacles of the fed govt have spread so far and wide, the EO might well affect all of us. So if the EO says "no one may enter a National Park w/o first displaying his SSN", the Park Service employees will obey it or lose their jobs.

2. The "30 days" is both true and false. It's true that the EO takes effect in 30 days. That's to give "heads up time" to the executive branch employees. The only actual effect of this 30 days is that an executive branch employee can't be disciplined for failure to obey the EO until the running of the 30 days. And if Congress acted during this 30 day period it could prevent the EO from becoming effective. But the unspoken implicit claim that if Congress doesn't act w/i the 30 days it can never act thereafter is false. Congress can eliminate the EO anytime, before or after the running of the 30 days.

3. The claim that states will have to revise their law to conform to an EO is bogus. States only have to conform to federal law which is either (a) constitutionally required, or (b) a federal act pursuant to the commerce clause. An EO is neither. But again, the EO binds the federal employee. So if we imagine a federal employee whose job is pouring out federal largess to a state, and the EO says "no more largess unless the state adopts a fingerprint law", then we're back to our familiar federal blackmail situation.

So, although an EO is not "law", and the states are not legally required to conform their law to an EO, yet the combination of (1) Federal employee obediance, (2) Congressional passivity, (3) federal involvement in every aspect of our lives, (4) states' hooked on federal money, and (5) the practical fact that the president can produce EOs much faster than Congress or the States can react, means that for all practical purposes a determined and unscrupulous president can use EOs to rule the nation by dictatorial fiat.

This appears to be happening today.

Ed Moats
edmoats@juno.com
23 Dec 1998