Why didn't any US Presidents use the power of executive decree to make slavery illegal...?

Question

..or women's right to vote...etc.

I don't buy the argument that "those were the times" or that "it would have caused the country to go into a turmoil" to which I reply "Civil War".

Answer 1

There's no word in the Constitution of the U.S. mentions that the President can make such a decree. Those legislations must be passed as a constitutional amendment.

Answer 2

Because an Executive Degree does not carry the weight of law, and can be nullified at any time.

You also have to take into consideration the effect that such a move would have on the country at that point in time. The Emancipation Proclamation had quite a dramatic effect on the country - in addition to freeing the slaves, it created hundreds of thousands of homeless freedmen, flooded the Northern job market with people needing jobs, and increased the poverty level both North and South (North because of the high number of unemployed/underemployed freedmen, South because the lack of a labor force destroyed the economy).

And the Emancipation Proclamation only abolished slavery in the Southern states, not the entire country. Slavery wasn't completely abolished in the United States until the ratification of the 13th Amendment in December 1865. Until then, it was still legal to own slaves in the North, although no one did.

As for the right of women to vote, if any President had attempted to shove this issue down the throats of the male population, the outcry would have been loud and long.

It's easy for us here in the 21st century to armchair-quarterback and say, "Gee, why didn't they just do this?" But what we fail to understand is - and here it comes - the way things were back then. Society and the United States were VERY different in the mid-1800's and the early 1900's. People in this day and age just don't seem to realize that.

Answer 3

Abe Lincoln didn't make slavery illegal because he was doing everything he could to keep the country from becoming divided. While he hated slavery, the more important issue was keeping the country from going to war with itself, a hard decision between the lesser of two evils. The fact that we went to war anyways doesn't mean anything, Lincoln would have had to know the future to know that we were going to go to war over this.

Lincoln also couldn't do anything because Presidents can't just pass law when ever they feel like it. Congress has to support it. And half of congress was from the south, and would not let anything abolishing slavery pass.

When gold was found in California, and it became a state, and they were against slavery, this outraged the south, because they were not getting another state too, and they would then be out-numbered in congress, which would lead to the end of slavery. So they tried to secede, which was illegal. Lincoln was left with no choice but to go to war to keep the country together. If he hadn't, we might have two individual countries here, and in one of them, slavery might still be legal.

The south thought they could not live without slaves. They thought everything would fall apart around them while their economies collapsed. They were wrong, but it took a war to show them that.

Answer 4

Why don't you buy that argument? It is historically accurate. I don't think the country could have been in more turmoil than the Civil War... I am pretty sure a war the nearly resulted in two countries and did result in more deaths of Americans than any other war qualifies as "turmoil"

Answer 5

Lincoln did have considerable power and used it:

Lincoln's most well-known action was the Emancipation Proclamation, issued on January 1, 1863 after the victory at Antietam. The proclamation freed all slaves held in areas still controlled by the Confederacy.

Answer 6

First of all, all the presidents were white. And we still to this day have that "Good Ol Boy Mentallity". Undertones (That we must stay in control,at all times). If you change the executive decree of slavery "Your'e going to be labeled a N" Lover. Oh God! We can't have that!!!
Women's right to vote (again Power and Control).

Still today! We have the same thing going on but different faces.
Blacks that have made a profound difference in this country marry whites. Or Money marries Money (Jay-Z and Beyonce) you can't tell me there was not a young woman who has been by Jay-z's side before he made it big. Sidney Poiter made it big and got rid of his wife and kids because; he simply out grew them. Sportsfigures (I don't want to go there). Just for the sake of not sounding to bitter. Because I call it like I see it.

People of color are just treated different in this country.
And most people will joke and say who has it the worse in this country a Black Female Lesbian. Next to her is the Black Women. We still got that Mother Figure--Imitation of Life- farsaad hanging over us.

Back of peoples minds they believe that Muslims are Terrorists.

Sad to say. But that is how it is. But we are slowly but surely evolving.

Peace

Answer 7

it really is person-friendly. in simple terms droop the structure, arrest the entire congress and ultimate court docket. Kill about 0.5 the governors and settlement for some military to go back over and end the U. S. protection pressure from protecting the structure. On second theory ... per chance in simple terms imagine the President serving his elected time period or words and then shifting on.

Answer 8

The idea of executive decree was suppose to be very very limited.
Not like Clinton who wrote more than any other president.

Presidents of old believe the way to pass laws was 1st through the House and than Senate on to the White House.

Not courts as we have gotten use to now.

Answer 9

There is only one answer to your question, profit. It did not profit any of our presdents to give women rights or to free slaves, however it was profitible to have slaves to do free work and selling slaves was also a money maker. Giving women rights to vote could cause complications in the way the government was run, or so they thinked. Everything is about money to our government and they are like this even today, thats also why we are in iraq, for oil and i have several family members serving overseas who feel the same way that i do.

Answer 10

It's my understanding from watching programs like Revolution that was about the American Revolution, that it was common for people in power (Presidents) to have been slave owners. Washington, Jefferson...I'm not sure about the rest. But also politicians have to give in to what the people wanted and the people wanted free labor. It has never been morally right to own another person, but the didn't really see slaves as people.