Bush above the Law in Brownwood ? To some "Republican Talking Heads" in Brownwood, he appears to be !

Editorial

July 25, 2006, 10:35PM
Signed away
Constitution's implied executive powers do not trump congressional powers lodged in the text.


Although many of its members are wealthy denizens of the establishment who resent paying high taxes and tend to vote Republican, the American Bar Association has acquired in the minds of many conservatives a liberal patina. This week, however, a panel of legal scholars and lawyers assembled by the ABA embraced an abiding, bedrock principle of the republic that no true conservative could reject: that our government is one with divided powers and checks and balances, and that no branch of government stands above the law and the Constitution.

The task force issued a report expressing alarm at statements that President Bush has issued to accompany legislation passed by Congress and signed by the president into law. In matters ranging from a ban on torture to protections for whistle-blowers to the prohibition of U.S. combat troops in Colombia, President Bush has stated that he will not be bound by all or part of legislation passed by a Republican-controlled Congress and signed by him into law.


The Constitution designates the president as commander in chief of the armed forces. It gives him the power to veto legislation. But nowhere does it give the president the option of choosing which laws to obey and enforce.

The White House relies on the belief that the Constitution's implied powers give the commander in chief broad latitude in military matters, but implied powers should not trump stated ones. The Constitution explicitly invests in Congress all legislative power and grants Congress the authority to pass legislation making rules for the regulation of the military.

Does the administration believe the Constitution implies that the president can disregard the Constitution?

Other presidents have issued signing statements. They usually state that the law was badly needed and admirably drafted, or that the president had reservations about parts of the bill and would ask Congress to pass revisions.

If anything is clear, the president is commanded to swear that he will preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. Signing into law bills the president regards as offensive to the Constitution is a poor way to defend it.

It doesn't take a great legal mind to arrive at this conclusion, only a healthy regard for the nation's oldest values: that government should be for the people, that Congress represents the people, and that no person may stand above the law.

source: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/4071951.html