Because any seizure of private property can be challenged in court, if at all actual statute under which it is is done is valid. If it is an invalid statute, the court will simply rule against the government. The court can provide injunctive relief to the private property owner till the case is settled depending on circumstances and the likelihood of who shall prevail.
Yes it can be challenged. That does not make it toothless. It takes a while and in the end the second or 3rd version will pass muster in the courts. The republican strategy of packing the courts is working. They got some version of the muslim immigration ban passed.
And do you really thin Pfizer would fight that hard if the US payed more per unit than other countries? They would say "sorry, we would like to but we can't, force majeur". And usually the US pays more for medicine than any other country. Most of the times that is a bad thing, but this once it may be to the advantage of the US.
The bar to seize private property in the USA by govt is one of the highest in the world.
Dude really? REALLY? You're serious? In which alternate reality are you living? Did you do any research here? 5 min on your favorite search engine? Look for example for civil asset forfeiture. That has nothing to do with Pfizer of course, there it would be eminent domain. The theoretical bar may be high, but practically the US has probably the worst protections in the western world. And we are in an exceptional emergency, similar to the scope of a war where governments can do what they want.
Even under national security rational. Assuming it manages to cross all those hurdles, the govt still has to compensate Pfizer for the market value of the property.
Which doesn't make it toothless. And if the US government needs to spend 5min of its defense budget on this, does that make a difference? They may have to go as high as an hour or a day maybe? It would be the best spent defense budget money. Would it make a difference if they made Pfizer the richest company in the world? Is there a difference between 6 trillion and 7 trillion national debt?
Trump could prevent the supply of materials from the USA but then other countries can retaliate too.
Again, not toothless. And I doubt they would. Maybe China but Western Europe? Until they got their act together the pandemic is over.
The executive order that President signed is indeed toothless and unenforceable.
Repetition does not make this sentence correct.
If it was signed with emergency powers (whatever they may be) and national security grounds, etc then may be it could be enforced. But not the way it has been issued.
So if this one does not work it will be reworded.
There is a big difference between issuing an order under correct legal statutes and enforcing it, vs merely signing an executive order that can't be enforced. That is just the legal part of it. Another is the practical aspect. Can Pfizer produce all the vaccine doses required in its USA plant in a timely manner that order dictates?
This I don't know and if they can't then this is another fact that cannot be bent to Trump's will. But i they can and he orders them to do so he will find a judge that says with 3k+ deaths a day, to hell with our allies.
So when you do a trade-off between legal requirements, practical enforcement, and time-line required to deliver along with the cost-benefits- it all is totally toothless and grandstanding to show that he is doing something.
It's interesting, you are using exactly the same tactics as Trump is, repeat a false statement often enough and it will get true. I'm not saying it won't work, it worked for Trump for 4 years and if he hadn't bumped against reality in form of this virus so hard, it would have worked for 8.
A president is a lame duck only in a political sense. Constitutionally and legally he has all the power to do what he is legal till Jan 20th, including pressing the nuclear button just because he feels like doing so and providing national security as a pretext. It will take disobedience and subjugation of the military commanders (who under the law will have to bear the consequences of defying the president's order as long as it was legal). The problem with the legal system is that it doesn't legislate morality. It was never designed to in the first place.
He is a lame duck, because he will not be able to reward/punish people in the future. Otherwise all the legal protections are not worth much.
www.propublica.org
Here's the thing: it is you who is being manipulated and will continue to be as long as you shy away from looking at the data and instead trust the conspiracy theorists that tell you what you want to hear. That's the sad irony of your pitiful comments.
(I expected that you have zero self-respect and will never be able to admit "my bad", but let's see, you still have a chance to redeem yourself, better late than never!)
that would be cherry on the icing