Tucker Gets Surprised By Constitutionalist Actor Richard Dreyfuss On The Importance Of Civics (Video)
Good thoughts. But clearly, the Constitution gives the Executive the power and the responsibility to see that the laws of the land are “faithfully executed.”
Withholding federal funds provided to states by the executive branch of the federal government to further that end can easily be argued as a legitimate factor in the Executive’s seeing that that takes place. The Executive is under no compulsion to continue to fund states which are violating the law of the land.
Amazingly, Dreyfuss behaved like an intelligent adult, which is unusual for Hollywood types.
RW: Tucker Carlson was surprised when Richard Dreyfuss emailed him one night and offered to come onto his program and “explain this rudimentary explanation of the basic checks and balances to you and your audience.” So Carlson took him up on his offer, inviting him on.
Carlson notes that Dreyfuss attended Oxford, studied civics, knows a lot about the Constitution and is a smart guy. He asks his opening question, “But where in the Constitution does it say states can do whatever they want in contravention of federal law and the rest of us have to be quiet and pay for it anyway?
Dreyfuss replies that it doesn’t say that. It simply says that the monies attached to things that the executive might want are the province of the Congress. And that, what was said in the judge’s ruling [Orrick] was that, that the executive didn’t have the power to withhold finances because that’s the province of the Congress. And that’s all I wanted to clarify because it is, as you say, a very rudimentary thing and we should all know a hell of a lot more than that.” More