OK, when I first heard this, my brain started thinking about historical examples of meddling by Congress in foreign relations (Manifest Destiny, the attempt to purchase Cuba after the annexation of Texas, and other works by the Democratic Party) . The next example I thought of was: In June 2007, Representative Steve King introduced legislation that would prohibit then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi from drawing on Federal funds to travel to foreign states which the U.S. deems to sponsor terrorism. King claimed that Pelosis dialogue with the Syrian government violated the Logan Act.[10] The amendment was not adopted. AND In United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936), however, Justice Sutherland wrote in the majority opinion: [T]he President alone has the power to speak or listen as a representative of the nation. He makes treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate; but he alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude, and Congress itself is powerless to invade it. I think McCain AND Pelosi and many others are guilty of being confused (old folks get that way) about the separation of powers. It may be that Mr. Speaker is now trying to demonstrate that branches of government are supposed to adhere to the job description prescribed by the Constitution, by setting a bad example. I do not like the look of any of this. news.yahoo/pelosi-boehner-invite-netanyahu-inappropriate-163032529--politics.html
Posted on: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 06:45:45 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015