View Poll Results: Is the use of the autopen to sign bills Constitutional?

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, it is

    10 35.71%
  • No, and it bothers me that Obama used it

    12 42.86%
  • No, but Obama's use of it doesn't really bother me

    2 7.14%
  • Don't know/don't care

    4 14.29%
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 53

Thread: Presidential use of the autopen

  1. #41
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: Presidential use of the autopen

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    Prove it. Sue and take it to the SCOTUS. See how far you get with that.
    I have no intention of violating the law... however, someone will run afoul of the provisions of the law and will use it as a defense...

    As for the wording of the Constitution, it is VERY CLEAR. It states that the President must sign the legislation. There is no ambiguity there...
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  2. #42
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Presidential use of the autopen

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    I have no intention of violating the law... however, someone will run afoul of the provisions of the law and will use it as a defense...

    As for the wording of the Constitution, it is VERY CLEAR. It states that the President must sign the legislation. There is no ambiguity there...
    If a congressional clerk faxes a copy of the legislation to the White House, and the president signs it and faxes a signed copy back to Congress, would you consider that a legitimate signature?
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  3. #43
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Presidential use of the autopen

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    So, it doesn't matter if he does anything illegal or unconstitutional, he is still your president and what he says, goes?
    For as long as he is the Head of State, and for as long as I am loyal to the State, then yes. Our government has lawful means to remove a sitting President from office, and until those methods have been followed to the letter and the President has been lawfully removed from office, he is the President.

    If any President ever does something severe enough to justify my refusal to recognize his authority, he will either be lawfully removed from office by the State, or I will be forced to break my affiliation with the State.

    On this, there is no middle ground.

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    I don't get the upset. Its not like 'Autopen' has taken a life of its own and is signing executive orders on its own. The President approved of and signed for the legislation. He is directly responsible for the signature, regardless of whether or not he signed it in person or from Europe.
    Exactly. The President signed the bill. The Autopen is nothing more than a writing implement.

  4. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    08-02-11 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    426

    Re: Presidential use of the autopen

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    The Constitution is VERY clear. It states that it must be signed by the president. It isn't intent of the President.

    Someone could challenge this in court and could possibly win, which creates a very dangerous situation.
    Mom, mom, Obama is playing with AUTOPEN...

    The Constitution was written over two hundred years ago. It might need a little revision every once in a while.

  5. #45
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Presidential use of the autopen

    I think we can come up with better things to be cross about in our government.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  6. #46
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: Presidential use of the autopen

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    I have no intention of violating the law... however, someone will run afoul of the provisions of the law and will use it as a defense...

    As for the wording of the Constitution, it is VERY CLEAR. It states that the President must sign the legislation. There is no ambiguity there...
    The debate is whether or not autopen classifies as the president signing it. Apparently, precedent would indicate that it does, thus nullifying this stupid constitutionality argument.
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    dimensionally transcendental
    Last Seen
    08-15-11 @ 04:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,153

    Re: Presidential use of the autopen

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    I don't think any president, in recent time, has read all the bills he has signed.
    Most likely he has received a brief by a staffer and said "yea or nay" to that.

    That should just about disqualify most bills passed in the last 20-30 years.
    Constitution doesn't say the President has to actually 'read' the bill. It does however say 'he' has to sign it... not a machine.

  8. #48
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Presidential use of the autopen

    Quote Originally Posted by atrasicarius View Post
    You know, I'm gonna go ahead and say that the Patriot act is a larger violation of the Constitution than using an autopen to sign it. If the founders were here right now, I think I can take a guess as to which one they'd be more concerned about.
    But, this missed Ludahai's point, at least as I see it. He doesn't seem to be challenging the validity of the laws signed with an autopen himself, and isn't arguing that they should be. Rather the concern is about someone else challenging those laws. This leads to a dangerous situation in some cases.
    You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    dimensionally transcendental
    Last Seen
    08-15-11 @ 04:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,153

    Re: Presidential use of the autopen

    If Palin used an autopen to sign things in Alaska, if certain posters would be all over her like white on rice.

    Just sayin...

  10. #50
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Presidential use of the autopen

    Quote Originally Posted by Whovian View Post
    Constitution doesn't say the President has to actually 'read' the bill. It does however say 'he' has to sign it... not a machine.
    The obvious purpose of that part of the Constitution was so that the president would have to either approve or reject the law, and a signature just happened to be the traditional way of indicating approval at the time (and still is). I can't imagine that the Founding Fathers would give a damn whether he performed the physical act of signing the law, as long as it's clear that he approved of it and was willing to affix his name to it. I mean, what practical implication of using an autopen is there, which the Founding Fathers could possibly have foreseen?
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •