Malcolm Rivera
President Obama's administration has been criticised for allegedly violating the US Constitution in several ways. These include the delay of Obamacare's employer and insurance mandates, outlandish Supreme Court arguments, and recess appointments. Obama's supporters, who have watched him duplicate and codify some of the Bush administration's civil liberties violations, had hoped that he would return the country to a stronger constitutional footing in his second term. Obama's critics also point to his abuse of executive power, such as re-writing Obamacare deadlines and releasing senior-level Taliban commanders from Guantanamo without notifying Congress. Some claim that Obama's actions mute Americans' religious freedoms and infringe on the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Violating the separation of powers | Launched the "We Can't Wait" initiative to act without congressional acquiescence |
| Delay of Obamacare's employer mandate | Cited statutory authority to delay reporting requirements, not the mandate itself |
| Delay of Obamacare's insurance requirements | Allowed non-complying plans to continue in 2014, contrary to Obamacare's language |
| Refusal to consider House-passed bill | Refused to consider a bill that would have legalized non-complying plans |
| Outlandish Supreme Court arguments | Between Jan 2012 and Jun 2013, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected extreme Justice Department positions 9 times |
| Recess appointments | Appointed 3 members of the National Labor Relations Board and the head of the CFPB during recess |
| Abuse of executive power | Released senior-level Taliban commanders from Guantanamo without notifying Congress |
| Infringement on religious freedoms | Signed a mandate requiring businesses to cover abortion-inducing drugs and birth control against religious beliefs |
| Infringement on civil liberties | Duplicated and codified damaging civil liberties violations, particularly on the 4th Amendment |
| Infringement on immigration rights | Failed to grant constitutional rights to those jailed under an administrative system, denying due process |
Explore related products
$56.46 $59
$32.64
What You'll Learn
- Obama's administration rewrote Obamacare deadlines
- Obama's administration delayed Obamacare's insurance requirements
- Obama's administration opposed new rules on timely disclosure of exculpatory evidence
- Obama's administration released senior-level Taliban commanders without notifying Congress
- Obama's mandate requires businesses to cover abortion-inducing drugs, violating religious freedom
Obama's administration rewrote Obamacare deadlines
In 2013, Obama's administration was accused of violating the US Constitution in several ways, with Obamacare featuring heavily in these criticisms.
One of the main issues was the delay of two key components of Obamacare: the employer mandate and insurance requirements. The employer mandate required businesses with at least 50 employees to provide complying insurance or pay a fine. By delaying the requirement, the administration cited statutory authority that allowed the postponement of certain reporting mandates, but not of the mandate itself. This delay was criticised as going against the explicit language of Obamacare.
Additionally, Obama's pledge that "if you like your plan, you can keep it" was broken when insurance companies began cancelling millions of plans that didn't comply with Obamacare's requirements. Despite this, Obama announced that people could continue buying non-complying plans in 2014, and he refused to consider a House-passed bill that would have legalised this action.
These actions, along with other controversies surrounding the Affordable Care Act, led to accusations that Obama's administration was going against the Constitution. The House Republicans even sued the Obama administration in 2014, alleging that cost-sharing reduction subsidy payments to insurers were unlawful because Congress had not appropriated funds for them.
In conclusion, while the delays and controversies surrounding Obamacare deadlines may not have been the sole reason for accusations of constitutional violations, they certainly played a significant role in the criticisms levelled against Obama's administration in 2013.
The Framers' Vision: Amendments to the US Constitution
You may want to see also
Obama's administration delayed Obamacare's insurance requirements
The Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare, was signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010. It was the first major change to the US healthcare system since the enactment of Medicare and Medicaid in 1965. The ACA's major provisions came into force in 2014, and by 2016, the uninsured share of the population had roughly halved, with an additional 20 to 24 million people covered.
However, Obama's administration delayed the implementation of certain aspects of the ACA, including the employer mandate. On the eve of the July 4 holiday, the administration announced via blog post that it was delaying the requirement that employers of at least 50 people provide complying insurance or pay a fine. The administration cited statutory authority for this delay, but critics argued that the cited provisions only allowed for the delay of certain reporting requirements, not the mandate itself.
In addition to the delay of the employer mandate, Obama's administration also delayed the insurance requirements of the ACA. The famous pledge that "if you like your plan, you can keep it" backfired when insurance companies started cancelling millions of plans that didn't comply with the ACA's requirements. Obama called a press conference to proclaim that people could continue buying non-complying plans in 2014, despite the ACA's explicit language to the contrary. He also refused to consider a House-passed bill that would have made this action legal.
The delays in implementing the ACA were not the only controversies surrounding Obama's administration and healthcare reform. Republicans attempted to defund the ACA's implementation and House Republicans refused to fund the federal government unless it came with an implementation delay. There were also legal challenges, with House Republicans suing the Obama administration in 2014, alleging that cost-sharing reduction subsidy payments to insurers were unlawful because Congress had not appropriated funds to pay for them.
Despite these controversies, the Obama administration made significant improvements to healthcare in the US. Millions of Americans who enrolled in Marketplace plans received financial assistance to help them afford quality coverage. The uninsured rate for women dropped by nearly 50% between September 2013 and January 2017, meaning that about 9.5 million adult women gained coverage. The Obama administration also took action to reduce prescription drug shortages and expand access to opioid treatment.
Common Core's Constitutional Education: What Students Learn
You may want to see also
Obama's administration opposed new rules on timely disclosure of exculpatory evidence
In 2013, Forbes published an article titled "President Obama's Top 10 Constitutional Violations of 2013". The list included the delay of Obamacare's employer mandate and insurance requirements, outlandish Supreme Court arguments, and recess appointments. The article also mentioned Obama's frustration with the separation of powers and his desire to “fundamentally transform” the country without congressional approval.
While the article does not directly mention Obama's administration opposing new rules on the timely disclosure of exculpatory evidence, it hints at a broader theme of constitutional violations and a disregard for established procedures.
Exculpatory evidence is a critical aspect of the US justice system. It refers to any evidence that proves the defendant's innocence or casts doubt on the prosecution's ability to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The timely disclosure of exculpatory evidence is mandated by due process, as per the US Supreme Court's ruling in Maryland vs. Brady.
Federal prosecutors are generally required to disclose exculpatory evidence within a reasonable time frame to allow the defendant to use it in their trial effectively. However, there may be instances where national security concerns or witness safety issues justify delaying or restricting access to such evidence. In these cases, strict procedures must be followed, as outlined in the Classified Information Procedures Act.
While I cannot find specific details on Obama's administration opposing new rules regarding the timely disclosure of exculpatory evidence, the aforementioned article and the broader context of constitutional violations suggest a pattern of disregarding established norms and procedures.
The Australian Constitution: A Concise Document of Pages
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Obama's administration released senior-level Taliban commanders without notifying Congress
In 2014, the Obama administration unilaterally released five senior Taliban commanders from Guantanamo Bay in exchange for Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl. This prisoner transfer was conducted without prior notification to Congress, as required by law. The Obama administration's failure to disclose the legal justification for this exchange sparked criticism and concerns about the potential impact on national security.
The law mandates that the executive branch provide Congress with specific information before releasing detainees from Guantanamo Bay. This includes a detailed statement justifying the release, an explanation of how it serves national security interests, and a strategy to prevent the prisoners' return to the battlefield. The Obama administration's decision to release the Taliban commanders without adhering to these requirements raised questions about the legality and appropriateness of the action.
Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa asserted that the Obama administration's failure to notify Congress and provide legal justification for the release amounted to unconstitutional behaviour. He emphasised the serious consequences of such decisions, particularly regarding national security. Grassley urged President-elect Trump to reverse what he considered harmful actions by the Obama administration, including this instance of non-compliance with legal procedures.
The Obama administration's decision to release the senior Taliban commanders without notifying Congress fits into a broader pattern of alleged constitutional violations. Critics have accused the administration of executive overreach, twisting the law and the Constitution to justify its actions, and keeping Congress and the American people in the dark about significant decisions. The delay in withdrawing US troops from Afghanistan, the We Can't Wait initiative, and the handling of Obamacare implementation have also been cited as examples of potential constitutional infractions by the Obama administration.
Dividing Power: The Constitution's Three-Branch System
You may want to see also
Obama's mandate requires businesses to cover abortion-inducing drugs, violating religious freedom
President Obama's administration has been accused of violating religious freedom by requiring businesses to cover abortion-inducing drugs. This mandate, known as the HHS Mandate, is a result of the Affordable Care Act or "Obamacare", passed in 2010. The mandate requires nearly all private health insurance plans to include coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization, and contraceptive drugs and devices.
While the Obama administration argued that this was an accommodation for religious institutions, as insurance companies and not the religious employers themselves would pay for these services, critics argue that this is disingenuous as the money insurance companies use to make payments ultimately comes from the premiums paid by employers. This includes religious institutions, who would have to provide employees with health plans covering "services" that violate their religious convictions or face fines.
This mandate has been criticised as an unprecedented attack on religious liberty and freedom of conscience, with citizens across the country rising up in response. The First Amendment and several federal laws protect the right to practice one's religious beliefs, and critics argue that the Obama administration's mandate is a radical incursion into freedom of conscience.
The Obama administration's response to criticism of the HHS Mandate is part of a broader pattern of behaviour that has been criticised as violating the US Constitution. For example, the administration has been criticised for its delay of Obamacare's employer mandate and insurance requirements, as well as its recess appointments and outlandish Supreme Court arguments.
Topeka Constitution: Voting Rights for White Men
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Obama's administration has been accused of going against the constitution in several instances, including the delay of Obamacare's employer and insurance mandates, outlandish Supreme Court arguments, and recess appointments.
The administration's delay in requiring employers to provide complying insurance or pay a fine and the delay in allowing people to buy non-complying plans in 2014 went against Obamacare's explicit language.
Between January 2012 and June 2013, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Justice Department's extreme positions nine times, ranging from criminal procedure to property rights, religious liberty, and immigration.
Obama appointed three members of the National Labor Relations Board and the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau during a recess, which was seen as a violation of the separation of powers and an attempt to circumvent congressional approval.
