Wednesday, June 18, 2014

Administration End Runs

A few blogposts ago, I raised the issue of the Department of Justice putting pressure on banks to close accounts of holders whose industries are frowned upon by the administration, such as gun dealers, gambling sites and porn stars.  Legal though it may be, it's not exactly what was contemplated by the separation of powers.  Those industries should be regulated by Congress, not the executive branch.

Today news broke that the United States Patent Office has cancelled the trademark registration for the NFL's Washington Redskins franchise finding, some seventy or eighty years after the team was formed and named, that the name is disparaging to Native Americans.   An earlier ruling, filed in 1999, was overturned by a federal appeals court.  Legal experts expect the same result this time.

I have no interest in the discussion as a football fan.  As anyone who follows this space knows, I am neither a fan of the Redskins team, I am at best a casual fan of pro football and I have somewhat of a conflict of interest in that my alma mater, the University of Illinois, is called the Fighting Illini and had its symbol, Chief Illiniwek, taken away by the NCAA for much the same reason, with which I disagree.  I think there are differences between the two cases, as Chief Illiniwek is not even comparable to Redskins when it comes to ethnic disparagement.  Furthermore, as an Irishman, I could take issue with Notre Dame's Fighting Irish and its dancing leprechaun, but I don't see the point.

Even so, it's an interesting debate.  By no means am I suggesting that Native Americans have no business to feel denigrated.  I'm not Native American and don't presume to speak for them.  But that's not the point.

What's worrisome to me is this extra-legislative way of effecting changes that this administration wants.  If it can't work with Congress to forge a legislative solution, the White House either issues an executive order or uses the force of the Department of Justice which, unlike Congress, is not filled with elected officials, to do its bidding.  Although technically there's nothing illegal with this -- compared with other things the administration has done -- this should worry every American.  This administration is dictating what is allowable by how it uses its office.  Gun rights, interest in porn or gambling and now whether Redskins should be an acceptable team name in a private enterprise are ripe for attack by this administration.

Ironically, the largely conservative Congress has the power to hamstring the administration.  It could easily get it to back off by using the power of the purse.  It could vote to cut funding to the Department of Justice or the White House, for that matter, deeming the President's trips to fundraisers unnecessary to the government.  It could pull funding for DOJ because it refuses to appoint a special prosecutor to look into such scandals as Fast and Furious, the IRS scandal or any of the other dozen scandals that have plagued the administration over the last couple of years.  It could defund anything that Susan Rice does on the principle that she's a nitwit.  Ms. Rice might actually thank Congress for doing her that favor.  But these plays by the administration call into question the traditional separation of powers and should give plenty of cause to people about what is becoming an activist administration.

It's one thing to oppose something.  It's another to work toward changing that with which the White House disagrees.  But it's another to use means that go behind Congress's back to effect a change that should be within the purview of Congress.

This should point out to people just how important the mid-term elections are.

Again, this is not to suggest that the Redskins name and logo should be left alone or even stay.  Perhaps it should go.  But it's not the White House's role to effect social change.  This borders on an abuse of power. The White House would do better working on its messaging and trying to tell the truth than worrying about whether a private entity is offending someone.

(c) 2014 The Truxton Spangler Chronicles

No comments:

Post a Comment