In the last couple of weeks there have been multiple news reports regarding President Biden “Trump-proofing” the government in advance of the newly elected President taking over as the voters have willed. The decision to veto the bi-partisan act that would create more federal judgeships was such a measure: though the new judges are desperately needed to address the backlog in the courts, apparently whoever is pulling Biden’s strings has decided that no new judges at all are better than Trump appointed judges.
Today there was another example. Bloomberg reported that President Biden is will issue an unusually resilient executive order permanently banning new offshore oil and gas development in some US coastal waters.The executive order will bar the sale of new drilling rights in portions of the country’s outer continental shelf, potentially foiling Trump’s promise to ramp up domestic energy production. The plan will exploit a 72-year-old law that gives the White House wide discretion to permanently protect US waters from oil and gas leasing. The same law does not without explicitly empower Presidents to revoke the designation. (It sounds legally dubious to me, but I haven’t read the law.)
Trump is expected to order a reversal of these attempted permanent protections, but whether he will be able to do so is unknown.
Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is this…
Ethics Alarms 
Jack asked, “Do you think it is ethical for an outgoing President to take measures to impede the agenda of the incoming President?”
It might be technically legal for the President to do such things to delay the new Presidents’ agenda but I think it’s clearly unethical and it would be unethical if Trump did it to any President that follows him. This practice is intentionally undermining the will of We the People.
Also, I think the notion that any Presidential Executive Order could be considered to be “permanent” and not subject to the possibility of change by a future President would be unconstitutional and undermine the power of the President of the United States. I think this would be quickly ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States.
I think this would be a really good one for the Constitutional Scholar Alan Dershowitz to argue in front of the Supreme Court.
“but I think it’s clearly unethical and it would be unethical if Trump did it to any President that follows him.”
If Trump did it, they’d impeach him!
If you believe you’re doing good things and want to make it difficult for people to undo them, that’s one thing. It’s another thing to try and prevent people from accomplishing their goals because you have decided they must always lose and don’t want others questioning that narrative. That doesn’t give people the opportunity to build trust.
“That doesn’t give people the opportunity to build trust.”
That seems a simplistic overview of Biden’s motivations vis-à-vis Trump.
Biden’s been calling Trump Hitler and an existential threat to democracy for well over four years. As have the mast majority of the Democrat Party.
If Trump really is pure evil and such an existential threat, then everything is justified and justifiable to stop him/her. How many thought experiments have we heard or read about where someone gets to travel back in time with the sole purpose of killing Hitler’s mother before Hitler was either conceived or born? What is one innocent woman’s life worth compared to the total destruction her unborn or unconceived child will wreak on the world?
Here, Biden, that Great Defender of the American Experiment, simply cannot bear what total misery Trump will rain down once he has unlimited, unchecked power. Biden is sure Trump will pour toxic chemicals in the drinking water, spray neurotoxins over farm lands, and liquidate the immigration detention camps with extreme prejudice, all so he can have a lot of empty land to build tacky new hotels, casinos, and shopping malls, all carrying his unholy name. The soul weeps at the mere suggestion.
Executive orders are supposed to aid officers and agencies of the Executive Branch manage operations within the federal government. They are not supposed to be new laws or overrule court decisions, usurping powers of the legislative or judicial branches of government.
Following what Steve W wrote above (which I think is correct) what Biden’s minions haven’t quite figured out, though, is this: if the President Biden can sign an executive order that is irrevocable and immutable and interminable with respect to off-shore drilling in federal waters, then any future President can sign executive orders with scope and breadth addressing, say, funding for increased gain-of-function research on a Pandora’s Box of viruses or gutting the EPA’s ability to ensure toxic landfills are properly maintained or authorize the Federal Reserve to end funding to certain economically disadvantaged areas or . . . Well, you get the picture. Talk about fascism and totalitarianism.
Petard, meet thy hoist.
jvb
Not only unethical, but now since the whole world has been alerted to Biden’s mental state, everyone knows it’s not his doing. The staffers running the show basically have unchecked power these last couple of weeks to do just about anything without consequence. It’s almost like they’re trying to provoke upper-class, Ivy League educated, white-collar young males into some kind of actions of last resort…
Until upcoming generations are reintroduced to The Golden Rule, things are just going to get worse.
“[N]ow since the whole world has been alerted to Biden’s mental state, everyone knows it’s not his doing.”
Congress Must Expose the Senility Coup | Frontpage Mag
I like the term “senility coup.” What action by “the Biden Administration” shouldn’t be deemed void for lack of capacity? Good work, Obama-ites! You’ve placed the country in an entirely unprecedented (unpresidented?) position.
I think it’s just a different form of sour grapes by Biden. I also think that the same people who said that there should not be further fights over Obamacare since Obama was re-elected in 2012 should not now be saying that it is okay for an outgoing president whose agenda was repudiated by the American people to try to prevent the incoming president, who did win the popular vote, from implementing his agenda. It’s also further dividing this nation along partisan lines
It is beyond unethical. It is down right tyrannical. But this is what Biden does and has done in the past. He cares nothing about the people he just likes to exercise power when he has it. He is a little man who knows he could never measure up on his own if he ever had to go man on man with an opponent unless he is given an advantage.
Biden should be careful because if Trump challenges any of these orders based on Biden’s obvious cognitive problems even his pardons can be questioned.
I’d take claims that Trump couldn’t reverse such an order with a huge grain of salt. The past few years in particular, what passes for sober legal analysis on the Left is often little more than wishful thinking, given the veneer of law by a parade of “experts” who’ve long since made themselves ridiculous.
Exactly. The Left’s pattern is to create ridiculous legal precedent that will never stand up to SCOTUS scrutiny, then talk about how good the new “laws” are and how the Trump-dominated SCOTUS will obviously ignore the will of the people because Trump controls the Court.
Then when the Court does indeed overturn the law, or Executive Order, or whatever it happens to be, the Court is blamed and Trump is blamed and Republicans are blamed.
But mostly Trump…and SCOTUS. And then Trump is blamed some more.
Which, of course really makes it smart when the liberals on the Court refuse to play along, as happened with the ridiculous Colorado ballot disqualification case.
Unethical, tyrannical, and perhaps illegal.
Personally,, I feel lame ducks should be estopped from major politial initittives from the day of their defeat in the election.
The counter argument is that a President is elected for 4 years, and is justified in advancing the agenda voted for by the voters who elected him for the full four years.
I agree with the others… while this maybe legal (although I am not sure it really is) it is not only unethical, but potentially ruinous for the US. Do I believe this is actually Biden’s doing… I am skeptical. Biden is unlikely to be cognitively impaired one moment and conniving the next. This is more than likely one of those that hitched themselves to the Biden Admin and are now trying to get their last digs in before leaving.
Agreed on President Biden running things. If the report that he only had nine cabinet meetings in total leading up the election is true – along with what I can see with my own eyes – I see no way he’s running anything or advancing any agenda or even speaking to a foreign leader. It’s all being done by (likely unelected) proxies.
Ethically speaking, tt’s rather difficult to justify actions aimed at deliberately hindering an incoming president’s agenda. It also further erodes public confidence in government institutions. It’s slimy.
Honestly, I don’t see how it’s EVER possible for a President or a Congress to take any actions that are legally binding on their successors.
Okay, with ONE exception: the lifetime appointment of individual judges would be the only thing.
But beyond that, how? Even a Constitutional amendment can be reversed, as has happened. This is just an outgoing President play-acting at being the new leader of “The Resistance”.
–Dwayne
You will recall that the epic case of Madison vs Marbury that established the Supreme Court’s oversight power arose from the same issue.