Presidential Nullification

And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgment of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song
--The Who

Nullification is usually defined in the context of states refusing to enforce what are perceived to be bad laws passed by the federal government. In this context, nullification can be seen as an expression of distrust in government and as a mechanism for coping with oppressive rule. 

More broadly, nullifaction can be seen as overt refusal to enforce law by an institutional entity. States can refuse to enforce a law. So could branches of the federal government.

Currenly, President Obama is preparing an executive order that would effectively nullify federal immigation law. Similar to Judge Nap, I can sympathize with this action to some degree. Under natural law, people should be free to travel where they wish--provided that they do not infringe on someone else's property rights.

However, under current our current system, open immigration policy in the US would infringe on the property rights of others. This is because immigrants could tap various social welfare programs funded by property taken from some people by force. Immigrants who partake in those services are party to robbery.

A president who selectively enforces federal law also portrays himself as a discretionary ruler who dictates legality by fiat--someone who believes in the rule by authority instead of rule of law and who thinks that he is above the law.

Finally, a president who nullifies federal law violates his oath of office. He essentially condones lawlessness. When someone else, be it another government official or Everyday Citizen, breaks a law, the president cannot complain or seek to prosecute.

Because he has done the same thing himself.