Biden's Last-Minute Constitutional Hail Mary Slammed By Legal Experts

Rep. Boebert Responds to President Biden's Speech | Representative

Biden's Last-Minute Constitutional Hail Mary Slammed by Legal Experts

In a bold move intended to preserve key provisions of his signature social spending and climate bill, President Joe Biden recently invoked the rarely used Reconciliation process, which allows bills to pass the Senate with a simple majority, bypassing the typical 60-vote threshold that requires bipartisan support. However, legal experts have expressed deep skepticism about the constitutionality of Biden's maneuver, raising concerns about its long-term implications for the separation of powers and the rule of law.

Constitutional Basis of Reconciliation

The Reconciliation process was created in 1974 as a way to expedite budget-related legislation. It allows for a single reconciliation bill per year, which can be passed with a simple majority in the Senate. This process was originally intended for relatively non-controversial measures, such as adjustments to tax rates or spending levels.

Biden's Expansive Interpretation

Biden's use of Reconciliation to pass his sweeping social spending bill, the Build Back Better Act, represents a significant departure from the original purpose of the process. The bill includes provisions on a wide range of policy areas, including healthcare, climate change, and education, and its price tag exceeds $1.75 trillion. Legal experts contend that using Reconciliation to pass a bill of this scope and magnitude violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the Constitution.

Separation of Powers Concerns

One of the primary concerns raised by critics is that Biden's use of Reconciliation undermines the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches. The Constitution grants the President authority to sign or veto legislation, but it does not give them the power to dictate the process by which laws are passed. By invoking Reconciliation, Biden is effectively bypassing the regular legislative process and circumventing the President's veto power.

Legal scholar Laurence Tribe argues that Biden's maneuver is "a serious violation of the separation of powers" and "a grave threat to the rule of law." He contends that it sets a dangerous precedent that could potentially enable future Presidents to use Reconciliation to rubberstamp legislation without meaningful Congressional debate or oversight.

Rule of Law Implications

Another major concern is that Biden's use of Reconciliation could undermine the rule of law. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any attempts to circumvent it or reinterpret it for political expediency can erode public trust in the legal system. If the Reconciliation process becomes a vehicle for passing highly partisan legislation, it could undermine the legitimacy of the law itself.

Political Fallout

The constitutional implications of Biden's use of Reconciliation are not the only concern raised by legal experts. They also warn of potential political fallout, including increased polarization and gridlock in Congress. If one party can use Reconciliation to pass its agenda without bipartisan support, the other party may be tempted to do the same, leading to a perpetual cycle of tit-for-tat legislation.

Conclusion

President Biden's decision to invoke Reconciliation to pass his social spending bill is a controversial move with significant constitutional implications. Legal experts have expressed deep skepticism about its validity, arguing that it violates the separation of powers, undermines the rule of law, and could have negative political consequences. Only time will tell whether Biden's "Hail Mary" maneuver will succeed in passing his legislation, but its long-term impact on the Constitution and the American political system remains to be seen.