News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by reissbaker on Monday February 03, 2025 @04:47PM (#42923667)
Why do you think it's illegal? USAID was established by an executive order by JFK, not by Congress; Congress only mandated that some agency for aid should exist, not that it specifically be USAID. Closing it and not replacing it with anything would be illegal, but closing it doesn't seem obviously illegal.

Edit: not only that, but they didn't close USAID entirely: they just closed the USAID headquarters, and installed Marco Rubio as the new head of USAID. While this may or may not be desirable, I don't see how this is actually illegal. The specific organization of USAID was established by executive order; this is one of the many consequences of the Republicans winning control of the executive branch of government.

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by magicalist on Monday February 03, 2025 @05:02PM (#42923874)
> Congress only mandated that some agency for aid should exist, not that it specifically be USAID

That was true in 1961, but not in the 63 years since then. The Foreign Assistance Act has been amended many times with specific requirements since written for the by then already existing United States Agency for International Development[1]

[1] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-1071/pdf/COMPS-107...

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by reissbaker on Monday February 03, 2025 @05:04PM (#42923900)
Nothing in that bill says that USAID needs a specific headquarters to be open, or that it can't be run by Marco Rubio. How is closing the HQ and assigning Marco Rubio to run USAID illegal?
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by magicalist on Monday February 03, 2025 @05:21PM (#42924120)
> How is closing the HQ and assigning Marco Rubio to run USAID illegal?

This framing seems disingenuous given the already far reaching effects of the frozen funding, the layoffs, the shut down of communications, the shuttered offices, and, apparently, giving non government employees unfettered access to its computer systems.

But yes, shutting down the USAID or trying to muddy the waters by saying it'll totally still exist, they'll just somehow run it out of the state department and not fund anything should indeed not be possible without an act of congress.

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by reissbaker on Monday February 03, 2025 @06:09PM (#42924679)
According to USC 6601 — which is the current law — the President literally has the power to abolish USAID entirely, and only has to submit a report about it to do it. [1] Saying that closing the HQ and assigning a Republican as the head of USAID is "illegal" or "should not be possible without an act of Congress" doesn't make sense. Congress already passed an act allowing the President to terminate USAID. Congress does not mandate that USAID exists forever, and does not prevent the President from terminating it or streamlining it.

1: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:22%20section:...

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by checkyoursudo on Monday February 03, 2025 @06:31PM (#42924907)
That is not at all what that says...
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by quickthrowman on Monday February 03, 2025 @06:17PM (#42924775)
… did you read the first sentence???

> Not later than 60 days after October 21, 1998

I’m pretty sure it’s now 2025, which is more than 60 days after Oct 21, 1998. Therefore, the president does not have power to abolish USAID. Please try again.

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by reissbaker on Monday February 03, 2025 @06:33PM (#42924929)
Ah, my read of that was that as of October 21, 1998, the President would have to submit a report to close USAID (whereas previously the President did not have to submit a report). However, your reading makes more sense.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by mrcode007 on Monday February 03, 2025 @08:50PM (#42926469)
It’s not his reading. It’s the only reading.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by ethbr1 on Monday February 03, 2025 @09:01PM (#42926584)
Did you read the bottom? Clinton already executed this in 1999.

>> Memorandum of President of the United States, Mar. 31, 1999, 64 F.R. 17079, provided...

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by dragonwriter on Tuesday February 04, 2025 @12:00PM (#42935196)
Uh, that obviously cannot be executing a power that expired 60 days after October 21, 1998.

(It was actually delegating power to revise the USAID reorganization plan—which was not a abolition—and to set the effective date of then part of the reorg that was not transfer of mandatory functions to the Secretary of State.)

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by tmaly on Monday February 03, 2025 @05:35PM (#42924275)
Are there any LLMs that can explain all the amendments to the layperson?
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by 65 on Monday February 03, 2025 @07:40PM (#42925685)
This is the most Hacker News comment I've ever read.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by daveguy on Monday February 03, 2025 @08:56PM (#42926526)
Not if you want accurate information.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by tmaly on Tuesday February 04, 2025 @11:54AM (#42935049)
I have used it on Municipal Codes to explain things. I just don't have enough background on federal law and how amendments are stored.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by mjburgess on Monday February 03, 2025 @04:59PM (#42923839)
That's not correct. Acts of congress specifically created the agency after JFK's XO.

Regardless, the agency is a party to contracts which it is currently breaking. The actions of DOGE are causing the US to break contracts, which is illegal.

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by alvah on Monday February 03, 2025 @07:16PM (#42925401)
A contract in itself is not law (though it can be legally enforceable), so how is breaking a contract illegal?
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by BikiniPrince on Monday February 03, 2025 @07:29PM (#42925556)
Furthermore, very likely any such contracts have language around the cancellation.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by mjburgess on Tuesday February 04, 2025 @05:43AM (#42930735)
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by alvah on Thursday February 06, 2025 @08:58PM (#42968461)
Ctrl-F "illegal" - 0 results
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by brookst on Monday February 03, 2025 @04:58PM (#42923828)
Interesting take. I think it applies to every agency? Shutter NASA, and any congressional act merely specifies an agency for aeronautics and space, not necessarily this exact one? As long as it’s eventually reconstituted, no foul.

I’m suspicious, but I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised we’ve hit the “one simple trick” era of governing.

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by reissbaker on Monday February 03, 2025 @05:12PM (#42924005)
No, NASA was specifically created by the "National Aeronautics and Space Act" [1], not by an executive order. USAID was created by executive order by JFK. [2]

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Aeronautics_and_Space...

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agency_for_Inter...

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by afavour on Monday February 03, 2025 @05:24PM (#42924151)
And USAID was then formalized as an independent agency by Congress in 1998:

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&...

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by reissbaker on Monday February 03, 2025 @06:04PM (#42924626)
The bill you link to specifically allows the President to abolish USAID: as it states,

Unless abolished pursuant to the reorganization plan submitted under section 6601 of this title, and except as provided in section 6562 of this title, there is within the Executive branch of Government the United States Agency for International Development as an entity described in section 104 of title 5. [1]

And here's the text of section 6601, which explains how to abolish USAID:

(a) Submission of plan and report Not later than 60 days after October 21, 1998, the President shall transmit to the appropriate congressional committees a reorganization plan and report regarding-

(1) the abolition of the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, the United States Information Agency, and the United States International Development Cooperation Agency in accordance with this chapter;

(2) with respect to the Agency for International Development, the consolidation and streamlining of the Agency and the transfer of certain functions of the Agency to the Department in accordance with section 6581 of this title;

(3) the termination of functions of each covered agency as may be necessary to effectuate the reorganization under this chapter, and the termination of the affairs of each agency abolished under this chapter;

(4) the transfer to the Department of the functions and personnel of each covered agency consistent with the provisions of this chapter; and

(5) the consolidation, reorganization, and streamlining of the Department in connection with the transfer of such functions and personnel in order to carry out such functions.

The President can abolish USAID, or can streamline it, or terminate functions within it, according to your own provided links, and only has to submit a report about it.

1: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?hl=false&edition=prelim&...

2: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:22%20section:...

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by mikeyouse on Monday February 03, 2025 @06:55PM (#42925162)
How do you keep ignoring this part:

“Not later than 60 days after October 21, 1998”

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by Aloisius on Monday February 03, 2025 @06:23PM (#42924831)
> Not later than 60 days after October 21, 1998

That provision expired 26 years ago.

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by reissbaker on Monday February 03, 2025 @06:34PM (#42924938)
Fair enough; my initial read was that this meant that as of October 21, 1998 reports would be required (whereas previously they weren't), but honestly I think that was the wrong read and you're right.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by bonzini on Monday February 03, 2025 @06:30PM (#42924898)
All you need is a time machine.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by insane_dreamer on Monday February 03, 2025 @04:58PM (#42923820)
They’re not replacing it with anything. They’re defunding it.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by llamaimperative on Monday February 03, 2025 @06:32PM (#42924922)
That's even more clearly illegal. The Executive doesn't determine where money goes.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:

> The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by dgfitz on Monday February 03, 2025 @05:52PM (#42924503)
Any plays on who is gonna win the Super Bowl? If I were you I’d find a betting market and put ALL my money on your claim.

Edit: Daww, no sense of humor?

Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by insane_dreamer on Monday February 03, 2025 @08:16PM (#42926087)
No need to guess when they’ve already publicly stated it.
Re:The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Gov... by idiotsecant on Monday February 03, 2025 @05:09PM (#42923955)
This seems like a stretch. If I close Wal-Mart headquarters does Walmart still exist? For a little while, maybe. Warehouses will probably run on autopilot, people will still get paid for a bit, etc, but the company is walking dead. What they've done is effectively decapitate an agency without the consent of the legislature.