Bush Says He Can Ignore Yet Another Law
This really is astounding. Boston Globe:
When President Bush last week signed the bill outlawing the torture of detainees, he quietly reserved the right to bypass the law under his powers as commander in chief.
After approving the bill last Friday, Bush issued a ''signing statement" -- an official document in which a president lays out his interpretation of a new law -- declaring that he will view the interrogation limits in the context of his broader powers to protect national security. This means Bush believes he can waive the restrictions, the White House and legal specialists said.
''The executive branch shall construe [the law] in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President . . . as Commander in Chief," Bush wrote, adding that this approach ''will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President . . . of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks."
Some legal specialists said yesterday that the president's signing statement, which was posted on the White House website but had gone unnoticed over the New Year's weekend, raises serious questions about whether he intends to follow the law.
A senior administration official, who spoke to a Globe reporter about the statement on condition of anonymity because he is not an official spokesman, said the president intended to reserve the right to use harsher methods in special situations involving national security.
You cannot "reserve the right" to break a law. The President has the veto, and that is the proper procedure for him to follow if he doesn't agree with what Congress passes. He should have used it if he believes that the McCain Amendment is inappropriate; to declare the intent to ignore the very law you are signing shakes the very foundation of this nation. And believe me, we'll be seeing the cracks widen years after Bush is gone.
Yep
". Last time I checked the Supreme Court interpreted laws and the President enforced the laws that Congress wrote and passed. But that was 1992 and perhaps things have changed just a bit."
That's exactly right. And much may have changed since 1992, but I didn't notice anyone repealing the constitution.
The Sage Never Lies
Tsze-lu asked,
"If the Duke of Wei made you an advisor,
what would you address as the very first priority?"
Confucius replied,
"The most important thing
is to use the correct words."
"What?" Tsze-lu replied.
"That's your first priority? The right words?"
Confucius said,
"You really are simple, Yu.
The Sage keeps his mouth shut
when he doesn't know what he's talking about!
"If we don't use the correct words,
we live public lies.
If we live public lies,
the political system is a sham.
"When the political system is a sham,
civil order and refinement deteriorate.
When civil order and refinement deteriorate,
injustice multiplies.
As injustice multiplies,
eventually the electorate is paralyzed
by public lawlessness.
"So the Sage takes for granted that he use the appropriate words,
and follow through on his promises with the appropriate deeds.
"The Sage must simply never speak lies."
Bush "Reserves" the right to torture
The reason he's started using that weird terminology is that nominee Alito has "made a case" for using the comments of the President when interpreting a statute being challenged in the courts.
Any guesses as to how he'll interpret this one if his nomination goes through?
Signing Statements as Interpretation of Law
Mathew Gross said:
I might be as screwed up as the Bush Administration on my Constitutional Law but last time I took a class on the subject, unless something changed recently, the President does not hold the power to interpret the law. Last time I checked the Supreme Court interpreted laws and the President enforced the laws that Congress wrote and passed. But that was 1992 and perhaps things have changed just a bit.
Just in case what I just wrote is misconstrued, I agree with you 100 percent Mathew. I take issue with a Bush Administration that wants to play judge, jury and executioner. They want to write the laws as they see fit, enforce the laws when those laws apply to anybody but themselves, and intrepret the laws in ways that serve their agenda.