About the Post

Author Information

Jennifer is Co-host of The Story of Liberty Radio Broadcast, video editor and creator, blogger & Web designer for the Story of Liberty. TheStoryofLiberty.net

house

Obama Executive Order Allows Seizure of Americans’ Bank Accounts

The combining of the legislative, executive, and judicial functions into one body. Not good for Freedom.

The latest executive order (EO) emanating from the White House October 9 now claims the power to freeze all bank accounts and stop any related financial transactions that a “sanctioned person” may own or try to perform — all in the name of “Iran Sanctions.”

Titled an “Executive Order from the President regarding Authorizing the Implementation of Certain Sanctions…” the order says that if an individual is declared by the president, the secretary of state, or the secretary of the treasury to be a “sanctioned person,” he (or she) will be unable to obtain access to his accounts, will be unable to process any loans (or make them), or move them to any other financial institution inside or outside the United States. In other words, his financial resources will have successfully been completely frozen. The EO expands its authority by making him unable to use any third party such as “a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, subgroup or other organization” that might wish to help him or allow him to obtain access to his funds.

And if the individual so “sanctioned” decides that the ruling is unfair, he isn’t allowed to sue. In two words, the individual has successfully been robbed blind.

But it’s all very legal. The EO says the president has his “vested authority” to issue it, and then references endless previous EOs, including one dating back to 1995 which declared a “state of emergency” (which hasn’t been lifted): Executive Order 12957.

Such EOs are the perfect embodiment of what the Founders feared the most: the combining of the legislative, executive, and judicial functions into one body. Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution says: “All legislative powers herein shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.” As Thomas Eddlem, writing for The New American, expressed it, “then it stands to reason [that] none is left for the president.”

When James Madison protested Washington’s usurpation of powers not intended for the president, Congress acquiesced and passed, retroactively, the Neutrality Act of 1794, validating Washington’s usurpation.

President Lincoln engaged in similar usurpations, using presidential “directives” to run the early months of the Civil War, presenting Congress with, as Todd Gaziano put it,

the decision either to adopt his [directives] as legislation or to cut off support for the Union army.

Within his first two months in office, on April 15, 1861, Lincoln issued a proclamation activating troops to defeat the Southern rebellion and for Congress to convene on July 4.

He also issued proclamations to procure warships and to expand the size of the military; in both cases, the proclamations provided for payment to be advanced from the Treasury without congressional approval.

These latter actions were probably unconstitutional, but Congress acquiesced in the face of wartime contingencies, and the matters were never challenged in court.

President Franklin Roosevelt often overlooked the niceties of constitutional restraints as well. As Gaziano expressed it, “FDR also showed a tendency to abuse his executive order authority and [to] claim powers that were not conferred on him in the Constitution or by statute.”

Read article here: http://thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/13196-another-obama-executive-order-allows-seizure-of-americans%E2%80%99-bank-accounts

Read Executive Order here:  http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/10/09/executive-order-president-regarding-authorizing-implementation-certain-s


About these ads

Tags: , , , , , ,

3 Comments on “Obama Executive Order Allows Seizure of Americans’ Bank Accounts”

  1. James Lee James Sr. October 16, 2012 at 9:33 pm #

    just another way to prove that obama and his co-horts are nothing but theives and crooks , out to steal the wealth of all Americans and destroy the financial institutions of this great country !

  2. Joe October 17, 2012 at 8:45 am #

    HE JUST DOESN’T WANT ROMNEY MOVING HIS MONEY AROUND – - I don’t understand why this presidency has to come to this- this means he can say u have no money to anyone involved in government as in supreme courts and stuff. I think Obama is dictating and obviously he his-

  3. Dean Factcheck October 18, 2012 at 3:43 pm #

    Well if you actually look at the legistlation behind this EO, the sanctions are defined in three congressional bills; Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-172) (ISA), the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-195) (CISADA), the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-158) (ITRSHRA). In short to be santioned you have to have made an investment of $20 million or more in any 12-month period that directly contributes to Iran’s or Syria’s ability to develop its petroleum resources. So if you have not been helping Iran or Syria develop their petroleum resources, you are not effected by this EO.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 139 other followers

%d bloggers like this: