Sunday, April 30, 2006

[politics] The rule of Law and all that...

Unclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: Media finally starting to report the President's systematic lawbreaking But is it enough? According to Greenwald, the Boston Globe has an article (which I'm heading over to read now) detailing nearly 1000 laws that the President has decided don't apply to him - so he's decided not to follow them by using a Constitutionally-dubious version of the 'signing statement'. Where once this statement was used to express displeasure or state reservations, it is now being used to state, baldly, that the President reserves the right to ignore those parts of the law (up to and including the whole bloody thing) if he decides it runs counter to his interests the interests of the country (yeah, right...). This is being done by a President from the same party that controls Congress! You know, the people who are creating those laws Bush is ignoring? And jurists purporting to share his philisophical outlook control the Supreme Court! You know, the people who are supposed to decide if laws are Constitutional? The only remedy would seem to be a Supreme Court decision or a Constitutional Amendment - and I don't see either of those happening any time soon. Does anyone have any idea what this does to checks and blances!? What checks or balances are there on the President's newly-found ability to disregard any law he chooses? That doesn't sound like a Democratic Republic to me.


Post a Comment

<< Home