1. "Forcing the Supreme Court" to look at the Constitutionality of the Patriot Act is no changing of the Constitution. It is the proper order to follow, when a question of Constitutionality exists. No change.
2. The powers of the Executive have always been broad and exclusive regarding matters involving other nations. No change.
3. The MCA is directed at enemy combatants, not citizens. Habeas Corpus has not been suspended for US citizens, only enemy combatants. No destruction.
The rest are vague claims.
With regards to homosexual marriage and abortion, these matters properly belong to the States. I doubt he intends any involvement.
2006-12-09 13:43:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
Even now they can't come up with an actual case where the constitution has been destroyed by President Bush!! Amazing and pathetic. Even to go as far as to blame him for others! The judges actually are doing the harm, they over ride his decisions and everybody elses. As for the Republicans picking them it is the Democrats who put up road blocks on every good judge they want to get in! I love people like you who make them all answer cause they so hate to get specific!!
2006-12-09 14:15:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by Brianne 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Bush had a secret meeting at midnight on a full moon night in Texas. Dick Cheney brought the original Constitution of The United States of America from the National Archives and burned it in a pagan voodoo ceremony intended to bring Hitler to life as ruler of the world. Caesar Chavez donated the oil to start the fire that burned the constitution. The ACLU brought the match...
2006-12-09 13:27:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
i actually enjoyed Bush up till his final 3 months in workplace. because of government bailouts, and because he and Congress did no longer do their interest at conserving the economic device, i'm actully somewhat pissed at him. the government has no reductions account, and a technique or the different we actual assume to flee an economic disaster with the help of going extra effective into debt. As for Obama, he appears like he needs to place issues like abortion and government bailouts on the particular lane. Obama seems so egotistical and crammed with himself. human beings compliment him with a cult like following , yet he hasn't achieved something yet. It took a Carter to get a Raegan, yet it took a Nicholas to get a Lenin. i do no longer think that Obama will bless our united states in any respect. i think of we will have an somewhat long 4 years forward individuals.
2016-10-14 09:03:57
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
When he was sworn in he swore and oath to defend the constitution and the laws of the United States of America. Since then he has signed over 800 bills into law. After signing these he also signed a "signing statement" which basically says he doesnt have to follow that law. No president is above the law. He has broken his oath over 800 times so far. Oh yeah. He's a real winner. Something for you republicans to be real proud of.
2006-12-09 18:48:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by Haven17 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
The lied to Congress about Iraq. That is a High Crime according to the founders of the Constitution. It is their duty to provide accurate information to the Congress so that it may accurately decide whether it is in our national interest to go to war. Detaining citizens without counsel or charges at the discretion of the President. Refusing to provide public disclosure of the identities and locations of persons who have been arrested, detained and imprisoned by the U.S. government in the United States, including in response to Congressional inquiry. Ordering and authorizing the seizure of assets of persons in the United States, prior to hearing or trial, for lawful or innocent association with any entity that at the discretionary designation of the Executive has been deemed "terrorist." Instituting a secret and illegal wiretapping and spying operation against the people of the United States through the National Security Agency. And these are only the things that are public record. If there are ever any investigations, I'm sure more damming information will come forward. And, if you dare look at the link below, you might see what many in our military have said that raises even deeper questions which I cannot substantiate, but are extremely disturbing to say the least.
2006-12-09 13:34:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by michaelsan 6
·
2⤊
4⤋
1. The Supreme Court struck down his system of military tribunals for the Guantanamo prisoners, so that clearly indicates he was attempting to violate the constitution.
http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/06/29/supreme_court_rejects_guantanamo_military_tribunal/
2. Additionally, he has decided that an attack by nineteen guys with knives is the equivilent of open rebellion by half of the nation, and has suspended habeus corpus as Lincoln did in the Civil War. This also is likely to be struck down by the Supreme Court.
For more info on why the MCA violates the constition, see:
http://ccr-ny.org/v2/legal/Docs/MCA_Signing_Briefing_Paper.pdf
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/15786466.htm?source=rss&channel=cctimes_news
And both of these are true with a Supreme Court with seven of the nine justices appointed by Republicans!
3. The American Bar Association has issued a report stating that they believe his signing statements (more than all other previous presidents combined) are also unconstitutional.
http://www.herdnation.com/forum/showthread.php?p=262119#post262119
4. Finally (at least for this answer), I'm quite sure his warrantless wiretapping program is a direct violation of the clear (and very generous) laws set forth by the FISA act, and though that is merely breaking a law, and not violating the constituion, Bush's suggestion that he isn't bound by the laws of Congress clearly violates the intent of the separation of powers.
2006-12-09 13:20:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by Steve 6
·
4⤊
4⤋
Our President has given the Constitution new meaning by forcing the courts to rule on the constitutionality of the Patriot Act, and the other practices the Attorney General implemented. Our Constitution has a purpose in America again and for many years it was rendered meaningless!1
2006-12-09 13:22:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by FEVER 3
·
4⤊
4⤋
And it is indeed unpatriotic and traitorous to the Constitution to support current policy, which is that "federal agents and local police can write their own search warrants, serve them on American financial institutions without the intervention of a judge, and obtain information about you without you even knowing it!" The PATRIOT Act "has allowed the government to circumvent completely the Fourth Amendment" and "makes it a crime – punishable by five years in jail – for the recipient of a self-written search warrant to tell anyone that he or she has received the search warrant." These rats know that they are rats.
It gets worse. "The government can now . . . break into your house . . . steal your checkbook, put an electronic bug under your kitchen table, and make it look like it was a house burglary. It can even leave and not tell you or the local police what has happened."
Dub-Yuh is recognized as the tyrant and dunce that he is: "President Bush does not recognize the constitutional limitations imposed on his office. His only concern is with victory over ‘the enemy,’ whoever that may be. "
2006-12-09 13:27:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by dstr 6
·
4⤊
4⤋
The Bush administration didn't do it and I am no Bush supporter either. Society has made the demands on the supreme court and the constitution since it was first introduced. It hardly resembles what it was then. The times they are a changin
2006-12-09 13:35:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by Enigma 6
·
1⤊
3⤋