Passive-Aggressive Executive Power

C. Lain
{"title":"Passive-Aggressive Executive Power","authors":"C. Lain","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/9h6ru","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What do the death penalty, driving violations, drugs, deportation, and the Defense of Marriage Act (�DOMA�) have in common, besides the letter �d�? The answer is passive-aggressive executive power, and in the brief discussion that follows, I use these five factual contexts to illustrate five variations of what I mean. When those charged with enforcing the law would prefer not to, what they do is not so different from what the rest of us do when pushed. At least five passive-aggressive responses easily come to mind�and at the outset, I set aside the �Just say no� response, which is an exercise of executive power but is not in the passive-aggressive category (because it is just plain aggressive). Here are the five responses: (1) do nothing, and hope nobody notices; (2) do something silly, and make a mockery of the whole enterprise; (3) say that you would do something, but you are too busy; (4) say that you would do something, but you are not competent; and say, in a moment of rare clarity and self-awareness, �Fine, I�ll do it, but let�s just be clear�I don�t want to.� In the discussion that follows, I first flush out these responses with my five examples�the death penalty, driving violations, drugs, deportation, and DOMA. I then offer some normative thoughts about each of these responses using the standard of a reasonably prudent thirteen-year-old and parallel institutional considerations in the realm of executive power.","PeriodicalId":81936,"journal":{"name":"Maryland law review (Baltimore, Md. : 1936)","volume":"35 3","pages":"227"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maryland law review (Baltimore, Md. : 1936)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/9h6ru","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

What do the death penalty, driving violations, drugs, deportation, and the Defense of Marriage Act (�DOMA�) have in common, besides the letter �d�? The answer is passive-aggressive executive power, and in the brief discussion that follows, I use these five factual contexts to illustrate five variations of what I mean. When those charged with enforcing the law would prefer not to, what they do is not so different from what the rest of us do when pushed. At least five passive-aggressive responses easily come to mind�and at the outset, I set aside the �Just say no� response, which is an exercise of executive power but is not in the passive-aggressive category (because it is just plain aggressive). Here are the five responses: (1) do nothing, and hope nobody notices; (2) do something silly, and make a mockery of the whole enterprise; (3) say that you would do something, but you are too busy; (4) say that you would do something, but you are not competent; and say, in a moment of rare clarity and self-awareness, �Fine, I�ll do it, but let�s just be clear�I don�t want to.� In the discussion that follows, I first flush out these responses with my five examples�the death penalty, driving violations, drugs, deportation, and DOMA. I then offer some normative thoughts about each of these responses using the standard of a reasonably prudent thirteen-year-old and parallel institutional considerations in the realm of executive power.
被动攻击型执行力
除了字母“d”之外,死刑、违章驾驶、毒品、驱逐出境和《婚姻保护法》(DOMA)还有什么共同点?答案是被动攻击型行政权力,在接下来的简短讨论中,我用这五个事实背景来说明我的意思的五种变化。当那些负责执法的人不愿意执法时,他们所做的与我们其他人在被迫时所做的并没有太大的不同。至少有五种被动攻击的反应很容易出现在我的脑海中——一开始,我把“直接说不”的反应放在一边,这是一种执行力的行使,但不属于被动攻击的范畴(因为它只是单纯的攻击)。以下是五种回应:(1)什么都不做,希望没有人注意到;(2)做一些愚蠢的事情,使整个企业的嘲弄;(3)说你想做某事,但你太忙;(4)说你想做某事,但你没有能力;然后在一个难得的清醒和自我意识的时刻说,“好吧,我会做的,但让我们明确一点——我不想做。”在接下来的讨论中,我首先用我的五个例子——死刑、违章驾驶、毒品、驱逐出境和捍卫婚姻法案——来引出这些回答。然后,我以一个相当谨慎的13岁孩子的标准,以及在行政权力领域中平行的制度考虑,对每一种反应提供一些规范性的思考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信