Question: Has a new crime mandating prison time ever been created by an "Executive Order" before?

[Tom Rinaldo]

Is there any precedent for what Trump is attempting to do by decree regarding flag burning? I naively always thought that crimes were defined by statutes passed as legislation and legally signed into law by the appropriate executive.

I see coverage of how Trump's Executive Order defies a Supreme Court ruling, but nothing about the implications of one man deciding what behavior constitutes criminal behavior and then dictating what the penalty for that crime will be. Maybe I'm missing it.

[johnnyfins]

1. My advice to any would be flag burners:

Burn Trump flags instead.

[Diamond_Dog]

5. Excellent idea.

[Aristus]

13. He'd probably "outlaw" that, as well.

Still, the XO is red meat for his redneck worshippers. They’ll screech, swing from the branches, and fling their shit in glee unless the Supreme Court rules against it.

[sabbat hunter]

2. Zero precedent

The power to create a new law lies in the hands of the legislative branch, not the presidential one. The president can only veto, or sign a bill in to law.

But all rules are thrown out under cantaloupe Caligula the corpulent.

[marble falls]

4. There is precident. See below.

[marble falls]

3. Yes. When Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus rights and the Surpreme Court over overturned him ...

Habeas Corpus Suspension Act
American Law during the Civil War

The Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, 12 Stat. 755, entitled An Act relating to Habeas Corpus, and regulating Judicial Proceedings in Certain Cases, was an Act of Congress that authorized the president of the United States to suspend the right of habeas corpus in response to the American Civil War and provided for the release of political prisoners. It began in the House of Representatives as an indemnity bill, introduced on December 5, 1862, releasing the president and his subordinates from any liability for having suspended habeas corpus without congressional approval.

Wikipedia

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. Thanks, I agree that it is relevant to this instance, but it seems to differ also

"The Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, 12 Stat. 755, entitled An Act relating to Habeas Corpus, and regulating Judicial Proceedings in Certain Cases, was an Act of Congress...

".... It began in the House of Representatives as an indemnity bill, introduced on December 5, 1862"

[Silent Type]

6. He's just blovating. He's got to get laws enacted, etc., to go after many people. Personally, I'd just burn MAGA hats,

confederate flags, etc. Honestly, I think burning objects at a protests is not the smartest move. Now stomping on red hats, trump dummies, etc., is OK.

[Fiendish Thingy]

8. I predict...

Nobody will be indicted, tried, convicted or sentenced to prison for violating a presidential executive order.

If no statute has been violated, there is no crime.

[relayerbob]

9. The Japanese internment camps were created by executive order

Not exactly the same, but close enough, IMO

[Happy Hoosier]

12. And clearly Unconstitutional, IMO

I know FDR was an amzing President, but that was flat-out wrong.

[onenote]

10. The Executive Order doesn't create a "new crime."

It doesn't mean actions taken pursuant to the EO would be constitutional but it doesn't create a "new" crime:

Sec. 2. Measures to Combat Desecration of the American Flag. (a) The Attorney General shall prioritize the enforcement to the fullest extent possible of our Nation’s criminal and civil laws against acts of American Flag desecration that violate applicable, content-neutral laws, while causing harm unrelated to expression, consistent with the First Amendment. This may include, but is not limited to, violent crimes; hate crimes, illegal discrimination against American citizens, or other violations of Americans’ civil rights; and crimes against property and the peace, as well as conspiracies and attempts to violate, and aiding and abetting others to violate, such laws.
(b) In cases where the Department of Justice or another executive department or agency (agency) determines that an instance of American Flag desecration may violate an applicable State or local law, such as open burning restrictions, disorderly conduct laws, or destruction of property laws, the agency shall refer the matter to the appropriate State or local authority for potential action.
(c) To the maximum extent permitted by the Constitution, the Attorney General shall vigorously prosecute those who violate our laws in ways that involve desecrating the American Flag, and may pursue litigation to clarify the scope of the First Amendment exceptions in this area.

[Tom Rinaldo]

14. Thanks. Are you citing from legislation passed by Congress?

If so, did it prescribe an exact sentence for those convicted?

[onenote]

16. I'm quoting the executive order.

Which doesn't "create" a "new law" but directs law enforcement to aggressively pursue existing laws against flag burners, such as laws against property damage. As I noted, that doesn't mean the enforcement efforts made pursuant to the EO will be constitutional. But they won't be based on any "new" laws.

Here's an example of a flag burning case where, prior to Trump's election, the defendant was convicted of violating an existing criminal statute;
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/rioter-federally-charged-damaging-us-government-property-union-station

[Happy Hoosier]

11. President's cannot create law by decree. Period. NT

[John Farmer]

19. But kings can.

There's no question that Krasnov thinks he has kingly powers now.

[peggysue2]

17. Agent Orange is completely lawless and . . .

Believes he can do ANYTHING. His EOs are decrees from the Anointed One, The Mad King. Congress is unwilling to stop him. The unSupreme Court has bowed to his whims and fantasies ruling that he shall not be held accountable. And the MAGA hive-mind has decided it wants to be ruled, not governed.

To own the libs, to institute a theocracy, to silence the populace, to rid the country of The Other and usher in the Tech Bros' Dark Enlightenment of unfettered grift with the military and AI controlling the masses.

The only wrenches being thrown are by citizen protests, lawsuits by resisters, judges who still believe in the Constitution and Blue state governors and their Democratic allies. This is slowing some of the momentum but not blocking it.

We're inside a cold civil war, a coup originating from the obscenely rich, ideologues and power hungry.

This will not end well. For anyone.

Never forget, never forgive.

[hildegaard28]

18. No

Because it is unconstitutional. The highest law of the land clearly spells out what each branch of government can and can't do. Just because President Dunce doesn't understand it doesn't mean he can do it. Any attempt at conviction will be tossed out in court. Even Dunce's judges can't find any support for it in the law.