Jim Sensenbrenner: “I have listened to this colloquy and, frankly, it doesn't state the law. The proposed Executive order, which I have a…”

“I have listened to this colloquy and, frankly, it doesn't state the law. The proposed Executive order, which I have a copy of, specifically states that nobody can force the Executive order in any court. So the Executive order is merely a piece of paper that certainly will not have any effect of law. Earlier today, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) was quoted on Fox News saying, Well, it can't be changed by Executive order because an Executive order can't change the law. She was right on in that respect. An Executive order can't change the law. But even on a policy question, President Obama, at a campaign rally when he was running for election, criticized the Bush administration's excessive use of Executive orders. Congress' job is to pass legislation. The President can veto it or sign it. Executive orders are not part of his power. The President also said, I'm not comfortable with doing something this significant through Executive orders, relating to trying terrorists in military commissions. Now, finally, it is basic law, as reiterated by the Supreme Court as late as 2006 in the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, that an Executive order cannot trump or change existing law. The Executive order that is being talked about now is a piece of paper. It will have no force and no effect.”