There is a concept of executive order, which I agree is being abused more and more these days. Duly noted. However, the President CANNOT enact legislation or interpret the Constitution, so those checks are still in place. If the Judicial Branch allows a President's executive order to stand, it is because they don't believe it represents a breach of Constitutionality. Unfortunately, the gray area is getting dangerously large in those departments....

I hope you don't gather from my remarks that I am any sort of presidential apologist; my point is that to directly accredit changes to the laws that affect our everyday lives to the acting President is perhaps less than accurate analysis. Even if the President's name is Bush. Fair enough?