About This Video
Title:
Published: Tue, 8 Sep 2009
Description: Are Obama's 'czars' unconstitutional? Judge Napolitano responds
Automatically Generated Transcript (may not be 100% accurate)
" What we've been reporting on the president's czar is these are special advisers who have the president's -- on specific issues like Wall Street bonuses. Border security cyber space and with Sunday's resignation of the controversial green jobs czar Dan Jones is his name. Over his past comments and associations with some questionable groups there is now a microscope over some of the people who are closest to the president. All told there are 33. Current czar is. They are not required to fill -- the exhaustive questionnaires at the White House requires every cabinet level secretary and deputy secretary position. They can even be hired without an FBI background check -- Supreme Court confirmation or congressional confirmation. Still not clear what most of these advisers are getting paid to do are getting paid for how much they're making and there are still four is our jobs that are open. Including bizarre for cyber security which I mentioned so are all of these advisors actually legal joining us now is judge and content out. Who is a Fox News senior judicial analyst good to see just 33 -- For more to go companies ours does it take to screw delightful but it is that the problem here that there is so many of them -- well."
" And it's as many as the Obama administration wants under current law I mean technically these -- Our presidential advisers he can ask their advice and they can give them their advice and he can put them on the federal payroll but. If he for example asks them to do things that should be done by other federal officials whose work must be transparent or whose work is accountable to the congress. Like -- cabinet secretary. That would violate the constitution and violating federal law. If he has them doing things in his own -- That would violate the constitution and violating federal law so what do you think we need to do about this week we need to change the law. And it is that would need to be done -- congress I -- this democratic congress they're not gonna changing laws and I don't know upset the president anyway when it comes to his ars in the what was actually changed in the Bush Administration Rick which. Authorize the president. To give top secret security clearance -- to allow anybody to look at documents that he wanted to prior to president George W. Bush. You couldn't have that kind of access to secrecy. Unless you had been investigated by the FBI and confirmed by the Senate. So by the congress giving that power to President Bush -- at thirteen czarist. President Obama has taken that same -- and given himself. 33 and I think you even said thirty -- ours but it really depends upon what they do somehow some way we need to find out. If these people are just giving the president advice which would be lawful even if -- advice on things that the constitution. Doesn't say the federal government has authority over. But if they are acting in the president's name or they are doing things under the law that only cabinet secretaries should do. Then the court sent the -- step in and stop them."
" But what is -- is really do in the end I mean you know they they don't have any budgetary power is -- a lot of people say they don't really have a lot of teams. As far as their portfolios are concerned. We know we make it a lot about nothing here and -- me about the president has czar is just because a lot of people are upset with the president. And and do what they feel he's imposing on the country know."
" I don't think we're making it the great question I don't think we're making a lot out of nothing and I'll give you an example. But TARP legislation gives great leeway. Do the secretary of the treasury as to how he wants to spend you know the number it's astronomical. 700 billion dollars not all of which has been spent. So who's whispering in his ears. But certain stars the particulars. -- that -- sent -- secretary Geithner is here. It's a former executive with the United Auto Workers so. Is there any reason to wonder why. That GM bankruptcy and the Chrysler bankruptcy were so favorable to the UAW. -- there was federal money involved in both. Which came from the secretary of the treasury we know who was whispering into his -- Now that whispering. Is lawful but if the west."
" becomes I'm gonna bypass the secretary and do this on my own. Then we have a serious problem with federal law being violent and see that a tough thing to prove you be if you'd be able that. You're not gonna get to make these guys don't you -- you can't subpoena as -- how do you do you find out what they're doing well the only way you could subpoena -- to subpoena -- czar of which we now have one. Who is you know resigned and under cover of darkness over the weekend yeah I don't like Ben Jones is gonna. Be invited to Capitol Hill anytime soon it would be like pulling teeth I judge -- a Fontana thanks so much always good to talk to you my friend finally come back."
More Videos From FOX News
The White House responds to the Wall Street bailout and Pakistan
Video|Sat, 20 Sep 2008|More from Latest Video
|Capitol Hillfound at0:37, 1:38
Will more taxing and spending stop stock market rally?
Video|Fri, 17 Jul 2009|More from News
|wall streetfound at1:55
Former White House press secretary analyzes the Obama administration
Video|Tue, 30 Jun 2009|More from Latest Video
|housing marketfound at13:51