Should executive orders be limited?

Answer:
This question asks an opinionated answer and will receive both positive and negative comments; with that in mind the answer is segregated to reflect both points of view:

Yes they should, because of:
  1. Executive orders should be eliminated outright; they are treated as 'laws' by enforcement and are intended to bypass the representative portion of government (elimination of a constitutional part of government from the law making process). The first executive orders could not effect citizens in the United States (1917) - this was removed in 1933, when executive orders were issued as "law" under FDR.





No they should not, because of:

  1. (no entries as of yet, please remove this line when a negative is added)
First answer by Charon9. Last edit by Charon9. Contributor trust: 268 [recommend contributor recommended]. Question popularity: 1 [recommend question].