Talk:Authority for Mandate Delay Act

United States: Government Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Mid-importance).

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Health and fitness Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

biased

The article doesn't cite an large exisitng body of law that supports the obama admin see, for instance, http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/08/16/right-wing-media-build-faulty-case-that-obama-i/195443

In particular, quoting from above url, a section which points out how biased the quote from Judge McConnell is:

   The relevant text requires that the President "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Scholars on both left and right concur that this broadly-worded phrasing indicates that the President is to exercise judgment, and handle his enforcement duties with fidelity to all laws, including, indeed, the Constitution. As McConnell himself notes, both Republican and Democratic Justice Departments have consistently opined that the clause authorizes a president even to decline enforcement of a statute altogether, if in good faith he determines it to be in violation of the Constitution. But, McConnell contends, a president cannot "refuse to enforce a statute he opposes for policy reasons." While surely correct, that contention is beside the point.

   The Administration has not postponed the employer mandate out of policy opposition to the ACA, nor to the specific provision itself. Thus, it's misleading to characterize the action as a "refusal to enforce." Rather, the President has authorized a minor temporary course correction regarding individual ACA provisions, necessary in his Administration's judgment to faithfully execute the overall statute, other related laws, and the purposes of the ACA's framers. As a legal as well as a practical matter, that's well within his job description. [The Atlantic, 7/17/13]  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.195.10.169 (talk) 23:31, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment moved from the article

I've removed the following unsourced comment from the article. It was added by this edit. It might belong on the talk page, though:

This is a straw man argument; while former Judge McConnell is quite correct the the president doesn't have authority to delay ACA based on policy, he does, per SCOTUS decisions, have the right to delay ACA if, in his judgement, he can more faithfully execute the laws this way.

That is, the SCOTUS recognizes that the presidents oath to "faithfully execute the law" in a complex society, may require adjustments.

-- John of Reading (talk) 11:04, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]