ABA Calls Bush's Signing Statements Unconstitutional

Real Life Events.

Go off topic and I will break you!

Moderator: Dictators in Training

ABA Calls Bush's Signing Statements Unconstitutional

Postby Arlos » Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:42 pm

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush's penchant for writing exceptions to laws he has just signed violates the Constitution, an American Bar Association task force says in a report highly critical of the practice.

The ABA group, which includes a one-time FBI director and former federal appeals court judge, said the president has overstepped his authority in attaching challenges to hundreds of new laws.

The attachments, known as bill-signing statements, say Bush reserves a right to revise, interpret or disregard measures on national security and constitutional grounds.

"This report raises serious concerns crucial to the survival of our democracy," said the ABA's president, Michael Greco. "If left unchecked, the president's practice does grave harm to the separation of powers doctrine, and the system of checks and balances that have sustained our democracy for more than two centuries."

Some congressional leaders had questioned the practice. The task force's recommendations, being released Monday in Washington, will be presented to the 410,000-member group next month at its annual meeting in Hawaii.

ABA policymakers will decide whether to denounce the statements and encourage a legal fight over them.

The task force said the statements suggest the president will decline to enforce some laws. Bush has had more than 800 signing statement challenges, compared with about 600 signing statements combined for all other presidents, the group said.

Noel J. Francisco, a former Bush administration attorney who practices law in Washington, said the president is doing nothing unusual or inappropriate.

"Presidents have always issued signing statements," he said. "This administration believes that it should make clear ... when the Congress is getting close to the lines that our Constitution draws."

Francisco said the administration's input is part of the give and take between the branches of government. "I think it's good that the debate is taking place at a public level," he added.

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow said last month that "it's important for the president at least to express reservations about the constitutionality of certain provisions."

The ABA report said President Reagan was the first to use the statements as a strategic weapon, and that it was encouraged by then-administration lawyer Samuel Alito -- now the newest Supreme Court justice.

The task force included former prosecutor Neal Sonnett of Miami; former FBI Director William Sessions; Patricia Wald, former chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit; former Republican Rep. Mickey Edwards; and former Reagan administration lawyer Bruce Fein; and law school professors and other lawyers.


Well, first, I don't think anyone could make the claim that the American Bar Association is either some kind of rabid liberal group OR that it is in some manner ignorant of law. So, when they stand up and say that something is violating the law and the constitution, methinks that should result in people sitting up and paying attention. I definitely hope they DO pursue lawsuits in this case. It has bugged me for a long time that Congress can pass a bill, such as the no-torture act, and Bush will just basically attach a leter to it saying "OK, it's law, but I reserve the right to ignroe it whenever I feel like it". That's completely outside the bounds of seperation of powers.

-Arlos
User avatar
Arlos
Admin Abuse Squad
Admin Abuse Squad
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:39 pm

Postby Zanchief » Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:44 pm

Arlos, it's war time, you're not supposed to say anything about your president.
User avatar
Zanchief
Chief Wahoo
Chief Wahoo
 
Posts: 14532
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2004 7:31 pm

Postby Phlegm » Mon Jul 24, 2006 1:28 pm

Bush is too busy giving massages to have time to do anything unconstitutional.
Phlegm
Nappy Headed Ho
Nappy Headed Ho
 
Posts: 6258
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:50 pm

Postby Eziekial » Mon Jul 24, 2006 1:34 pm

Now they are worried? A little too late I'm afraid.
User avatar
Eziekial
NT Traveller
NT Traveller
 
Posts: 3282
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:43 pm
Location: Florida

Postby Captain Insano » Mon Jul 24, 2006 1:58 pm

I'm just waiting for the government to grant Bush a lifetime term and start construction of the death star.

It's the logical next step.
Tossica: No, you're gay because you suck on cocks.

Darcler:
Get rid of the pictures of the goofy looking white guy. That opens two right there.

Mazzletoffarado: That's me fucktard
Vivalicious wrote:Lots of females don't want you to put your penis in their mouths. Some prefer it in their ass.
User avatar
Captain Insano
Nappy Headed Ho
Nappy Headed Ho
 
Posts: 8368
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 1:04 pm
Location: SoCal

Postby Lionking » Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:44 pm

The ABA is a rabid liberal group. :angel:
User avatar
Lionking
NT Veteran
NT Veteran
 
Posts: 1063
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2005 3:09 pm
Location: In front of my TV watching football

Postby Donnel » Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:15 pm

They are ignorant of the law too.
<a href="http://wow.allakhazam.com/profile.html?384300">Treston</a>
Donnel
NT Traveller
NT Traveller
 
Posts: 2126
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 9:00 am

Postby Lyion » Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:34 pm

[quote="NR"]So what’s wrong with the ABA report on presidential signing statements? Here are the two biggest flaws:


1. The ABA task force’s central conclusion is that the President’s only choice, when presented a bill that has a provision that he believes is unconstitutional, is to veto the bill. Here’s the task force’s reasoning (on pages 18-19): (A) The Presentment Clause (Article I, section 7, clause 2) provides that every bill which shall have passed both houses of Congress shall be presented to the President for signature or veto. (B) Under the Take Care Clause (Article II, section 3), the President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.â€
What saves a man is to take a step. Then another step.
C. S. Lewis
User avatar
Lyion
Admin Abuse Squad
Admin Abuse Squad
 
Posts: 14376
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 1:42 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby Arlos » Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:42 pm

What a shocker, the National Review writing an article in support of Bush! *gasp* Who ever would have thought it possible! /faint.

So, lets see, in support of the findings, we have the Deans (or former deans) of Yale and Stanford Law schools, and a senior professor at Harvard Law. Gee, they only represent what, probably the 3 most prestigious law schools in the entire nation? And among the top 10 (if not top 5) in the entire WORLD?

In opposition we have what, some random flack at the National Review? The National Review, mind you, is so partisan an organization that it makes MoveOn look moderate. Bush could take a steaming diarrheal dump on their dinner plates, and they'd call it gourmet service, and eat heartily.

Gee, I wonder which side I should believe... Hmmmm....

Funny, I think I'll stick with the Bar Association...

-Arlos
User avatar
Arlos
Admin Abuse Squad
Admin Abuse Squad
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:39 pm

Postby Lyion » Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:48 pm

Pfah, like it was ever in doubt what side a liberal would take.
What saves a man is to take a step. Then another step.
C. S. Lewis
User avatar
Lyion
Admin Abuse Squad
Admin Abuse Squad
 
Posts: 14376
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 1:42 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby Diekan » Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:27 pm

Let me break this to you all as gently as possible. [They] could come out tomorrow and sware a new form of government in which the president would serve as dictator - and the average American wouldn't care one bit. "Oh he's doing what? Who cares, turn on the TV American Idol is on!!!!!11!!"

As much as I like living in this country - I can't help but admit that the rest of the world is correct in their opinion of us. Americans in general are lazy and dumb. Not stupid - just dumb. They do have the intelligence to learn, they're just to lazy to apply themselves.

Go out and ask ten people if they name 10 state capitals, ask them if they can name the Sec or State, ask them if they even know who the VP of the country is... then ask 'em if they know who won American Idol last season.

You all can laugh if you want - but mark my words - the US will not be a "free" country 50 to a hundred years from now. The american people will lose their freedom out of ignorance and laziness. Mark my words.
User avatar
Diekan
NT Deity
NT Deity
 
Posts: 5736
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 10:14 am

Postby Narrock » Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:33 pm

Diekan wrote:Let me break this to you all as gently as possible. [They] could come out tomorrow and sware a new form of government in which the president would serve as dictator - and the average American wouldn't care one bit. "Oh he's doing what? Who cares, turn on the TV American Idol is on!!!!!11!!"

As much as I like living in this country - I can't help but admit that the rest of the world is correct in their opinion of us. Americans in general are lazy and dumb. Not stupid - just dumb. They do have the intelligence to learn, they're just to lazy to apply themselves.

Go out and ask ten people if they name 10 state capitals, ask them if they can name the Sec or State, ask them if they even know who the VP of the country is... then ask 'em if they know who won American Idol last season.

You all can laugh if you want - but mark my words - the US will not be a "free" country 50 to a hundred years from now. The american people will lose their freedom out of ignorance and laziness. Mark my words.


QFT
“The more I study science the more I believe in God.” -- Albert Einstein
Narrock
NT Patron
NT Patron
 
Posts: 16679
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:54 pm
Location: Folsom, CA

Postby Harrison » Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:49 pm

:ugh:

I won't even pick that post apart. It speaks for itself quite clearly.
How do you like this spoiler, motherfucker? -Lyion
User avatar
Harrison
NT Legend
NT Legend
 
Posts: 20323
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 12:13 am
Location: New Bedford, MA

Postby Captain Insano » Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:49 pm

I don't see how the deathstar fits into all this? get back on topic gentlemen.
Tossica: No, you're gay because you suck on cocks.

Darcler:
Get rid of the pictures of the goofy looking white guy. That opens two right there.

Mazzletoffarado: That's me fucktard
Vivalicious wrote:Lots of females don't want you to put your penis in their mouths. Some prefer it in their ass.
User avatar
Captain Insano
Nappy Headed Ho
Nappy Headed Ho
 
Posts: 8368
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 1:04 pm
Location: SoCal

Postby Lyion » Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:54 pm

I don't think so, Diek. I actually think our generation is heads and shoulders SMARTER than the boomers, so I think things will get much, much better.

What I'd like to see is our country return to a more federalist standard and get away from the philosophy of having the federal government be an enabler. The Fed should be 1/10th the size it is and spend next to nothing.
What saves a man is to take a step. Then another step.
C. S. Lewis
User avatar
Lyion
Admin Abuse Squad
Admin Abuse Squad
 
Posts: 14376
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 1:42 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby Phlegm » Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:17 pm

Captain Insano wrote:I don't see how the deathstar fits into all this? get back on topic gentlemen.


The death star will be work on by a bunch of illegals to cut down the cost.
Phlegm
Nappy Headed Ho
Nappy Headed Ho
 
Posts: 6258
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 5:50 pm


Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests