Whether or not he could is largely irrelevant. Executive orders can be completely undone by the next administration. Plus I’d wager this is out of scope for an executive order. Executive orders generally have to do with operations issues with the federal government.
He can issue an executive order to limit the number of immigrants can cross the US-Mexico border per day because that’s an operational issue for an agency within the executive branch. He can’t say, “Everyone can have access to IVF”. Essentially, he’d be saying that individual states can’t make illegal, IVF procedures. That’s a legislative policy issue, and would be up to congress to pass a law that would force the states to fall in line.
That’s my understanding at least. I’m sure I’ve mucked something up in that explanation, but would wager that the overall gist of it is correct.
Like both legislative statutes and the regulations promulgated by government agencies, executive orders are subject to judicial review and may be overturned if the orders lack support by statute or the Constitution. Some policy initiatives require approval by the legislative branch, but executive orders have significant influence over the internal affairs of government, deciding how and to what degree legislation will be enforced, dealing with emergencies, waging wars, and in general fine-tuning policy choices in the implementation of broad statutes. As the head of state and head of government of the United States, as well as commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces, only the president of the United States can issue an executive order.
Whether or not he could is largely irrelevant. Executive orders can be completely undone by the next administration. Plus I’d wager this is out of scope for an executive order. Executive orders generally have to do with operations issues with the federal government.
He can issue an executive order to limit the number of immigrants can cross the US-Mexico border per day because that’s an operational issue for an agency within the executive branch. He can’t say, “Everyone can have access to IVF”. Essentially, he’d be saying that individual states can’t make illegal, IVF procedures. That’s a legislative policy issue, and would be up to congress to pass a law that would force the states to fall in line.
That’s my understanding at least. I’m sure I’ve mucked something up in that explanation, but would wager that the overall gist of it is correct.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order
him doing something even if it is doomed to fail would show more than just votes and asking for more funding
You’re going to have to read past the first two sentences.
But like I said… he can’t. There’s no “doomed to fail” about it… it’s outside his executive powers. He can’t dictate law.
emergencies count
if you’re actually interested, even the considerable powers granted in a state of emergency are defined by laws passed by Congress:
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/guide-emergency-powers-and-their-use
link you posted backs up what said
he more than could executive order this
choosing not to do anything except to make it a fundraising topic for the DNC
not trying to be both sides but the way this is playing out benefits BOTH sides but NOT the people
gives the democrats something else to say they voted on and it gives the republicans something else to be against