[mullingitover]

> Disregarding a law that was passed by a bipartisan majority

It was a rider tacked onto a must-pass bill. There’s nothing about the manner it was passed that makes it special or particularly blessed. This was classic congressional sausage-making.

[LZ_Khan]

And yet the law is the law. There's no premise that says the manner in which a law is passed determines its enforceability.

[mullingitover]

Also nothing saying that it will be enforced at all as long as the bribes are deposited on time.

[afiori]

Sorry but this argument does not make sense, AFAIK this extension is lawful and explicitly permitted by the same law, so the law was followed any way.

Or are you saying that the public perception of the law should itself be the law?

[LZ_Khan]

I'm not saying the extension is unlawful. The person I replied to seemed to imply an addendum to a law should be less enforceable than the primary focus of the law. I was simply addressing that statement.

[mullingitover]

I didn’t say it was unenforceable, just pointing it there’s nothing special about which parties voted for it out by how much.

But also at the end of the day the executive branch has sole power to enforce it or not, and if the president doesn’t want to enforce it there’s really nothing Congress or the courts can do about it other than impeaching him, which realistically won’t happen. The two parties have captured the system of three-way checks and balances, and a cult of personality has captured the party with trifecta power. That’s the game, folks. We live in an autocracy now.