It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
ok so they, Obama's legal team say it will pass but do we the people say it so? I am no way a constitutional expert who is the question is does it nee to be personally signed that is to say does the person signing a doc need to be physically in front of; and with, by human hand sign or will this be ok ? What say ye the people. from the link
Obama's team relied on a 29-page legal analysis crafted during the administration of President George W. Bush to argue that the faux signature passed constitutional muster.
should it be used just for that? what do you think?
It's the open secret that nobody in government wants to talk about: That cherished presidential signature that's tucked away in a scrapbook or framed for all to see might never have passed under the president's hand.
Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by Schkeptick
that is one no.
May i ask if your are in the US? If so have you let your congress rep /sen know how you feel?
Originally posted by Schkeptick
Letting laws be signed by a machine opens up a world of opportunity for abuse. It should not be allowed.
Originally posted by Schkeptick
Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by Schkeptick
that is one no.
May i ask if your are in the US? If so have you let your congress rep /sen know how you feel?
Hi - I am American but do not live in the USA right now. I missed it - is this coming before Congress?
On May 27, 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama became the first president to use an autopen to sign a bill into law.[2] While visiting France, he authorized the use of an autopen to create his signature which signed into law an extension of three key provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act.[3] Republican leaders have raised questions as to whether this use of the Autopen meets the Constitutional requirement for signing a bill into law.[
Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by The Old American
one more for yes
ok lets say he is out of the US and marshal law is needed to be declared the auto pen fails, a sec of foreign affairs signs the law as the pres with the pres ok/ order is it legal? not that this would happen just saying if some one had to sign it as the pres tracing the pres just like the auto pen does, is it legal. if not why
edit on 27-6-2011 by bekod because: (no reason given)edit on 27-6-2011 by bekod because: editting
Originally posted by The Old American
Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by The Old American
one more for yes
ok lets say he is out of the US and marshal law is needed to be declared the auto pen fails, a sec of foreign affairs signs the law as the pres with the pres ok/ order is it legal? not that this would happen just saying if some one had to sign it as the pres tracing the pres just like the auto pen does, is it legal. if not why
edit on 27-6-2011 by bekod because: (no reason given)edit on 27-6-2011 by bekod because: editting
That I am aware of, it is not legal. In order to impose martial law, Congress must issue the suspension of habeas corpus, while the President can authorize use of military resources (however unwisely) against the citizenry. So not only does martial law have to be a joint decision by two branches of Congress, it can only be declared by them, with no proctors speaking for either.
/TOA