In my previous article, I made the point that the President of the United States has zero authority to change the law. Only Congress has any authority to make or change any law. While it is technically possible for the President to direct his Justice Department to not enforce the law (clearly wrong, if not unconstitutional) by dint of his power over the Executive Branch, and to therefore, take the heat, it is not possible for the President to take the rap for directing citizens to break the law.
However, here is the further and very important extrapolation: Since the President has no authority to provide waivers or exemptions from any law, those waivers or exemptions have no force of law. Simply, those waivers or exemptions are imaginary.
When President Hippie supplied certain persons and businesses waivers and exemptions against the ACA-Obamacare, those who received such waivers and exemptions received imaginary waivers and exemptions. In other words, those persons and businesses do not have waivers and exemptions.
It is the same as if I, without authority, gave you an exemption or waiver from, let's say, wearing seat belts. Hearing this, you go driving, you get pulled over, and you try to tell the nice policeman that I, without authority, gave you the right to drive without seat belts. What do you think will happen? If you're not taken away for 24-hour observation, you will get a ticket. I will suffer no consequence at all. I, having no authority, am not responsible for your actions.
However, the President of the United States, having much more public clout, could be charged in any number of fashions for providing imaginary waivers and exemptions. First, aiding and abetting in a crime. Second, conspiracy. Third, treason, for inciting a public uprising, the uprising of those who utilize their imaginary waivers and exemptions.
Has anybody anywhere discussed possible consequences against those who would invoke imaginary waivers and exemptions? Saying "The President told me I don't have to participate" is not an excuse. Any judge worth his salt will be legally bound to rule that such waivers and exemptions, not being statutory, not written in the law, have no force of law. Can you imagine the chaos when the first person or business sued for not participating with the ACA-Obamacare invokes a waiver or exemption, only to find it imaginary and without force of law?
Now, we must ask, why aren't our Congressmen making this case? Why are even those in the Tea Party ignoring this important point?