Orchid LLC logo

Air Force One

Written by Orchid

|

May 30, 2014

|

0 comments
It’s Friday morning and the weather has been sufficiently fine across the country. Many of you are likely half way out the door for the weekend.  But, hang on for just a minute and let’s talk cold turkey about Executive Orders and gun bans. You may recall back in April 2014 a letter was circulated from Congress to the President, calling upon him to issue a stylized gun importation ban via Executive Order.  What makes this not just yesterday’s news is that more than 60 days later we don’t have a decisive position out of the White House one way or the other and we’re heading into another push within at least two state legislatures poised for major votes prior to the legislative summer recess. Are we about to witness another round of the early 2013 legislation and executive branch directives? You should remember that in early 2013, major legislation pushed through rapid votes in NY, CT, MD, and CO.  What you might have forgotten was that in that early 2013 wave of legislation were the “Presidential Action Items” issued by the President.  We posted and tracked those items on our Orchid Advisors’ website.  And, on all fronts, the President and various Executive Branch Agencies have followed through, steadily, and largely unnoticed, with the designated action items.  It’s even fair to say that while the four state bills triggered lawsuits, nothing in particular was filed against the President’s Action Items. A little bit of history may be in order here.  Rewind back to the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban – a piece of legislative history of which many of you have familiarity.  It was not long thereafter in 1997 that various members of Congress called upon then President Clinton to sign a federal import ban on various firearms.  There was an immediate 120-day freeze put on imports, as well as firearms in transit, all of which had certain shared characteristics that were to be reviewed. In 1998, the ATF (then under the Department of the Treasury) convened a “Working Group” and issued a paper examining the question of various features that could distinguish a military assault weapon from a sporting semiautomatic rifle or pistol.  President Clinton went on in 1998 to ban the importation of the firearms in question, as well as the denial of the pending permits. What is an “Executive Order,” you ask?  The question of what is an “Executive Order” is one that sends scholars of the U.S. Constitution into tailspins.  Is there any federal, constitutional authority for such a device?  Is it subject to judicial review?  When does it cross the line into quasi-legislative action that should be undertaken through the peoples’ representatives? In short, the “Executive Order” is a mechanism through which a President unilaterally signs a decree.  It is a device that has been used by both political parties and it has been used across many presidencies, sometimes inciting more controversy than others.  There are equivalent devices used by governors in various states. So in January 2013 when president Obama elected to issue “Presidential Action Items” as opposed to the “Executive Order” it was feared would be forthcoming, there was something of a sigh of relief that “at least” it wasn’t an “Executive Order.”  The concept of a “presidential action item” was a creative spin, and this particular list was less ominous than the media run-up to the actual announcement. Fast-forward to the present.  Within the past few days, we’ve heard announcements in MA and Chicago, IL of new bills aimed at garnering the title of “most strict” in the country.  Already, legislators in NJ put Bill A2006 on the Governor’s desk relative to magazine size. What’s the bottom line to our advisory today? It’s not summer break until the legislatures are out and the President boards Air Force One.

0 Comments