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.
2006-07-27 00:24:55 · 11 answers · asked by tough as hell 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
YES!
2006-07-27 00:28:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
definitely in accordance to the msot recent polls 35% of folk - (are all of them individuals?) help President Bush 36% of folk (comparable as above) help the Democrat led Congress. I for one would be happy whilst new elections are held in below 2 years. President Bush would be long gone, shall we desire a great variety of Congressional contributors would be long gone too.
2016-10-08 09:14:23 · answer #2 · answered by bungay 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hell yes there should be accountablity.......
The fact that Spector is involved
is indication of how serious this is all going to be.
During the confrimation of to the fourth curuit there was testimony by a member of legal dept in regards to the power of a wartime president.
Legal council under senate testimony to Sen Lehey
the president is always right"
that is what planet they are on.
remember nixion " when the president does it, that mean its not illegal"
2006-07-27 00:40:36 · answer #3 · answered by nefariousx 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
SO this provides me little examples of what bush is doing in any particular case and leads me to wonder what is going on.
2006-07-27 00:31:57 · answer #4 · answered by playtoofast 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Presidents do not put themselves in office.A President should be answerable to his people because he is their servant the trappings of political power notwithstanding.
2006-07-27 00:39:00 · answer #5 · answered by genie 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
that would be cool to hand him over to some terrorist country and let them handle him in their own way and video tape the whole thing and post it on the net for free!
2006-07-27 00:32:05 · answer #6 · answered by redirus92 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Is Bush becoming a dictator?
Then it is tough as hell for Americans.
2006-07-27 00:33:48 · answer #7 · answered by Electric 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1933. Not yet, but the machinery is in place.
2006-07-27 00:31:29 · answer #8 · answered by iansand 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
bush will not have to answer to anybody until we have a house and senate that puts America before their own party!!!!!!
2006-07-27 00:29:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
YES YES YES
He won't
He hasn't yet
2006-07-27 00:38:18 · answer #10 · answered by john p 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He is ur president....he should answer to u...not to the ARABS.
2006-07-27 01:34:40 · answer #11 · answered by Marcos 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋