> They don't because it is clearly written down in checks notes the constitution.
Often, it is not. But they don't have to (except as a fairly recent, self-imposed rule of the House of Representatives) explain any argument that it is, in advance, nor even when they do is the government bound to only that advance argument on its Constitutional justification.
Similar, regulatory agencies , while they tend to identify their statutory authority when making regulatory actions, aren't required to justify their claims of authority in advance. When they are contested, it is resolved in the courts, whether its Congress or executive branch regulators.
> Factually, our government doesn’t operate on whims and feelings or work it out in the courts later.
Factually, that’s exactly what our government does a lot of the time.
Ideally (in many people’s view) that’s not what it should do, but facts and ideals are different things.
Often, it is not. But they don't have to (except as a fairly recent, self-imposed rule of the House of Representatives) explain any argument that it is, in advance, nor even when they do is the government bound to only that advance argument on its Constitutional justification.
Similar, regulatory agencies , while they tend to identify their statutory authority when making regulatory actions, aren't required to justify their claims of authority in advance. When they are contested, it is resolved in the courts, whether its Congress or executive branch regulators.
> Factually, our government doesn’t operate on whims and feelings or work it out in the courts later.
Factually, that’s exactly what our government does a lot of the time.
Ideally (in many people’s view) that’s not what it should do, but facts and ideals are different things.