Congress can override a presidential veto. Congress overrides Obama’s veto of 9/11 bill that states that families of 9/11 victims can sue Saudi Arabia. If ⅔ of congress vote to override, the bill will be passed to a law, disregarding the president's veto. The first successful override was on March 3, 1845 of John Tyler’s veto of S. 66. 106 vetoes have been overridden
It is also true that Johnson was never kicked out of office due to the sufficient majority who wanted to keep him in, allowing him to win the acquittal.
I hope the following link helps support fact and actual truth. https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/
First off, you are wrong. There has been a presidential veto that has been overridden. One large example of this is bill number H.R.2419 during President Bush's term within two days of the veto.
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/
Here is some extra information to adapt the knowledge of the overrides in president Bush's term.
Having a bill die in Congress does not prove anything about the President being more powerful than Congress. It is just the way congress works, not the presidency.
Presidential appointments must be confirmed by Congress.
Congress went through many trials with Brett kavanaugh to appoint him, due to things found out about his youth years, causing the confirmation hearing to be one of the most contentious in history.
In the past 100 years, the senate has rejected 3 nominations.
Article II section 2 empowers the president to nominate and, “by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate”, to appoint principal officers.
Also, most presidents do it in a way that the pocket veto cannot be undone, which also accounts for a majority of the 2,580 pocket vetos.
Congress can impeach the president.
If the House votes to impeach an elected official, the accused party gets a hearing in the Senate. A two-thirds majority can convict the individual and remove him or her from office.
The founding fathers intended for more presidential impeachments to happen. Federalist 65 helps to back this up. This paper discusses the power of the Senate to try impeachment cases. The problem Hamilton addresses is that the accuser of wrongdoing as well as the judge of the accusation are both political bodies. Hamilton warned that the process of impeachment might become political, causing factions to polarize further away from each other in their defense or prosecution of the impeached individual.
Congress can use this to subpoena people and threaten people, holding power over their heads.
The Supremacy Clause does not grant power to any federal government, such as Congress. It deals with resolving a conflict between the federal and state governments once federal power has been validly exercised. As stated in the constitution, “the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby.” By stating this, it shows that the congress was trying to create a balance between state government and national. By allowing state representatives into meetings, it shows that the opinion of the state did matter.
The federal government should have power to tax the people and states. The taxation of people is important to help pay off national debt. As stated in Article 1 section nine of the Constitution, “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” By having a larger population, the federal government will change the taxes placed on its people based off of what the census needs not personal connection and feelings, or leisure.
A standing army is necessary! Without the standing army there will be a mess of militias. As the country grows, the lack of organization will lead to big militias with many demagogues trying to take over. Eventually without an organized army, the militias will lead themselves into self destruction. The Constitution will help create a balance in this issue. The Constitution will allow for both a controlled and organized militia system and standing army. With this, both the federalist and anti federalist will be appeased. There will be control of the states and nation with both a militia system and standing army, as well as maintain individual liberty.
A large republic is ideal. A large republic is better than a small republic because it is easier to avoid having majorities that would use the power they have to their own benefit. The larger the population is, the larger the republic should be. The larger the republic is, the less people will agree upon a narrow subject. If you have a family sized bag of Skittles and want a handful of them, the more colors you would have than if you were to reach into a box of Lemonheads. In the skittle you have more different colors, but in the box of Lemonheads, they are all the same. This relates to having a large republic with people representing from all over the place which represents the Skittles. In a small republic, you have people with similar interests, representing the Lemonheads.
A standing army is beneficial for the growth and protection of the United States of America . Without a standing army, the United States is wide open to invasion with no restraint. States still have militias! What we, the federalist, are adding is protection from outside powers. As stated in the constitutions, the militias are in power to “execute the Laws of the Union”; however, the militias are not in sole power of themselves. Instead, congress will provide organization, armory, and disciplinary actions to the militias. Both militias and a standing army will add layers of protection to the American population. One layer would be the standing army protecting people from foreign enemies. While the militia would help enforce the laws to help domestic issues, protecting us from ourselves.
don't responddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd
A standing army is beneficial for the growth and protection of the United States of America . Without a standing army, the United States is wide open to invasion with no restraint. States still have militias! What we, the federalist, are adding is protection from outside powers. As stated in the constitutions, the militias are in power to “execute the Laws of the Union”; however, the militias are not in sole power of themselves. Instead, congress will provide organization, armory, and disciplinary actions to the militias. Both militias and a standing army will add layers of protection to the American population. One layer would be the standing army protecting people from foreign enemies. While the militia would help enforce the laws to help domestic issues, protecting us from ourselves.
