Practice question
A presidential adviser invokes residual executive power to defend an order that, on the stipulated facts, establishes a new compulsory payment by private persons and a new criminal penalty without any legislative authorization. The adviser argues that Marcos v. Manglapus makes all unenumerated measures valid. No emergency delegation or other legal grant is identified. Which response is strongest?
- Residual executive power is not an unlimited power to legislate new obligations and penalties
- Every unenumerated measure is valid under Marcos
- The absence of legislative authority is cured by naming the order administrative
- The President may erase every separation-of-powers limit through residual power
- An adviser's recommendation is itself a statutory grant
Legal references
- 1987 Constitution, Article VII, Sections 1 and 17: https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html
- Marcos v. Manglapus, G.R. No. 88211, September 15, 1989, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1989/sep1989/gr_88211_1989.html
- Ople v. Torres, G.R. No. 127685, July 23, 1998, main decision, administrative-power discussion: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/36082
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.