Sunday, March 05, 2006

Security and Sovereignty No. 3: The President's Duties

In this 3’rd posting, the duties and powers of the President with regard to our border security and protection of the States from invasion are discussed. In summary, the President is responsible for national security; and through the entire Constitution, but especially the Preamble and Article IV, for protecting the sovereignty of the United States. Note the terms “union”, “common defense”, and “protect each of them against invasion”, this latter one referring to the States.

The Preamble. We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The Oath of Office. Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Serves as Commander in Chief. Article II, Section 2 of the U.S Constitution. The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Protects Each State Against Invasion. Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Thus, the President must defend the constitution through his oath of office (this covers Article IV, Section 4 wherein the States must be defended against invasion) and he is Commander in Chief of U.S. military forces. The President has broad powers under the Constitution. Not only does he command all military forces but also administratively controls (i.e. supervises) each of the executive Departments, including DHS which controls the Border Patrol. Therefore, his duties and authority for border security and protection are clear.

This is not to say that the Congress and the Courts do not have significant roles to play. Congress can pass legislation affecting immigration policies and the specific laws governing our borders and can provide or withhold funding for the military and the executive departments. The Courts can, and have had significant impacts on our treatment of illegal aliens through their rulings. (More on Congress and the Courts in a subsequent posting; and it isn’t pretty). The public, of course can remove a President by not allowing him a second term and the Congress can impeach and convict (never done in our history) a President to remove him from office. So we see, barring extraordinary circumstances a President is free to enforce the laws to the degree he sees fit. Usually it is a matter of course that Presidents enforce the laws to the best of their abilities. However, President Bush has shown unbelievable sympathy with the infiltration of our country by illegal aliens and promotes an open borders/mass amnesty policy. Since congress is deeply divided on this issue and liberal courts often take the side of ACLU and their like, it is easy for the Executive branch of government to be less than enthusiastic or efficient in enforcing laws against illegal immigrants and their U.S. employers. This gives rise to such things as the catch and release of illegal aliens, the U.S. Border patrol being understaffed and under funded and internal enforcement of our illegal alien and hiring laws being essentially nonexistent. The President has also used the “bully pulpit” of his office to support illegal immigration/mass amnesty. His statements such as “family issues don’t stop at the border (or Rio Grande)”, the “minutemen are vigilantes”, and “to do the work Americans won’t do” have had a tremendous impact on encouraging millions of additional illegal immigrants to infiltrate the U.S. in recent years.

In summarizing this entry, although the role of Congress and the Courts are critical in national security and sovereignty, the President provides critical national leadership by performing his Constitutional duties and by using the persuasive power of his office to lead our national administrative and law enforcement resources either for or against illegal immigration/mass amnesty. President Bush has been able to meet his Constitutional duties in the formal leadership role but has been extremely biased toward the open borders side in his use of the presidential persuasive powers. Given his heroic performance after 9/11 in fighting the war on terror, many of us are mystified as to how he can support open borders nearly 5 years later. How can the heroic 9/11 President be in league with Ted Kennedy, John McCain, Arlen Specter, the ACLU, and others of that ilk in working to reduce the security and sovereignty of our nation? It is not easily understood.

2 Comments:

At 7:32 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting thought process. Idealistic perhaps but interesting. While border patrol and the guarding of our borders is, of course, the responsibility of our President, it is also the responsibility of our people. Unfortunately, our majority of our people are not as concerned with this problem as they should be, at least in my opinion. There needs to be laws that govern these illegal refugees (and there are)and those laws need to be enforced. That means that these minutemen, however noble the cause, need to ensure that the course they are on is legal and within the boundaries of the law. If not, then actions need to be taken to ensure that they are. The individuals who are enforcing the law need to do so honestly - without briberies and such - this is not happening. The power of the almight dollar is swaying their positions to look the other way. I do not believe that our President is taking the side of such liberals as Ted Kennedy and Hilary Clinton - and definately not the side of the ACLU - heaven forbid, but instead, he is trying to do a job that is not supported by the Press nor by alot of Americans because it is alot easier to ridicule one man and one office, than to be responsible for your own actions, or lack thereof. Regarding the ports situation, well that is another matter altogether and maybe better left for another comment. Thanks for your articles and insights - while I may not always agree with them, I do appreciate the research that goes into them and your thought process in reaching the conclusions. Have a great day!

 
At 9:45 AM, Blogger LomaAlta said...

Thank you for your comments. They are helpful in examining the border security problem.

Agree, the American people are not as concerned with border security and illegal immigration as much as they should be. But, this is changing. And, granted the rate may be too slow to impact the political process in time to counter current legislation in the US Senate.

The Minutemen were tested, they were under close scrutiny by the press, followed and “monitored” by the radical ACLU, and observed by the Border Patrol and other federal agents. The Minutemen demonstrated conclusively that simple, entirely lawful (even under the microscope of the open border advocates), nonviolent observations of the border could be used to stop illegal immigrants. They simply observed and reported observations of illegal immigrants to the Border Patrol. And, as Americans they do have the right to assemble under our Constitution, specifically the First Amendment “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” When President Bush called the Minutemen “vigilantes” he was, in fact, supporting the ACLU position on the Minutemen.

As to the honesty of the individuals guarding our borders, I too have read news accounts of drug smuggling and bribery. But I don’t have knowledge of this problem and thinking it small, I did not cite it in the posting.

As stated above, the President was taking the side of the ACLU via his “vigilantes” comments. And, he is a strong supporter of guest worker/mass amnesty proposals such as those that are at this very minute being proposed by Kennedy-McCain and Specter.

I agree, the President has been under relentless and unfair attack by the radical left and their MSM for his positive actions on the War on Terror, tax policies, judicial appointments, and foreign policy. As unfair as these attacks have been and as much as we like to defend him against them, this does not justify his open borders/mass amnesty policies given the obvious threats to our security and sovereignty.

Again, thank you for your thoughtful comments and kind words.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home