"Calling into question the legitimacy of all the signing statements that former President George W. Bush used to challenge new laws," The New York Times reported Monday. In essence, President Obama "promised yesterday that he would rarely impose his own interpretation of legislation by attaching statements when he signs bills," The Washington Post reported, "pulling back significantly from the controversial use of the tactic by his predecessor, George W. Bush."The New York Times also reported Monday that: "President Obama on Monday ordered executive officials to consult with Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. before relying on any of them to bypass a statute.The Washington Post followed up this announcement by explaining that Obama: "... promised yesterday that he would rarely impose his own interpretation of legislation by attaching statements when he signs bills, pulling back significantly from the controversial use of the tactic by his predecessor, George W. Bush."
"... Mr. Obama also signaled that he intends to use signing statements himself," The New York Times reported, "if Congress sends him legislation that has provisions he decides are unconstitutional. He pledged to use a modest approach when doing so, but said there was a role for the practice if used appropriately." Obama explained according to the Washington Post: "There is no doubt that the practice of issuing such statements can be abused," he said in the memo. "I will issue signing statements to address constitutional concerns only when it is appropriate to do so as a means of discharging my constitutional responsibilities."
“In exercising my responsibility to determine whether a provision of an enrolled bill is unconstitutional, I will act with caution and restraint, based only on interpretations of the Constitution that are well-founded,” Mr. Obama wrote in a memorandum to the heads of all departments and agencies in the executive branch."
The New York Times reported : "Mr. Obama’s directions marked the latest step in his administration’s effort to deal with a series of legal and policy disputes it inherited from the Bush administration. It came the same day that Mr. Obama lifted restrictions Mr. Bush had placed on federal financing for research that uses embryonic stem cells."
The NewYork Times explains: "Mr. Bush’s use of signing statements — official legal documents issued by a president the day he signs bills into law, instructing executive officials how to implement the statutes — led to fierce controversy.
The Times continues: "Mr. Bush frequently used signing statements to declare that provisions in the bills he was signing were unconstitutional constraints on executive power, claiming that the laws did not need to be enforced or obeyed as written. The laws he challenged included a torture ban and requirements that Congress be given detailed reports about how the Justice Department was using the counter-terrorism powers in the USA Patriot Act.
It was under Bush that: "... the practice became controversial as Bush dramatically increased its use. Critics accused him of using the previously little-known tactic to subvert the intent of Congress, especially on issues of terrorism, torture and domestic surveillance. In one case, for example, Bush asserted in a signing statement that his administration was not bound by a law he signed prohibiting torture of U.S.-held detainees."
The Washington Post continues: "Longtime Bush critics, however, excoriated Obama for failing to put a complete end to the practice. "There should be a clean break with the past on this," said Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel to the American Civil Liberties Union. "The president shouldn't be asserting -- as President Bush did -- wholesale objections to entire sections of statutes and claiming some kind of presidential authority to ignore them. Anders said his group appreciates Obama's pledge to reduce the number of signing statements. But he said the danger remains that, instead of using the statements to provide guidance to government officials, the new president could use them to ignore the will of the legislature."
Dating back to the 19th century, presidents have occasionally signed a bill while declaring that one or more provisions were unconstitutional. Presidents began doing so more frequently starting with the Reagan administration.
"But Mr. Bush broke all records, using signing statements to challenge about 1,200 bill sections over his eight years in office — about twice the number challenged by all previous presidents combined, according to data compiled by Christopher Kelley, a political science professor at Miami University in Ohio.
"Many of Mr. Bush’s challenges were based on an aggressive view of the president’s power, as commander-in-chief, to take actions he believed necessary to protect national security regardless of what Congress said in federal statutes."
"American Bar Association President H. Thomas Wells Jr. said Obama has taken "significant steps" but has not gone far enough. "The proof is going to be in the pudding when we see his first presidential signing statement and how many times he uses it," Wells said.
"Obama pledged to use signing statements sparingly and to be bound by "interpretations of the Constitution that are well founded." And he promised to restrict such statements by working with members of Congress to fix possible constitutional problems before bills reach his desk."
"Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters that the president wants to return the practice to its original intent.
"This president will use signing statements in order to go back to what has been previously done, and that is to enumerate constitutional problems that either the Justice Department or the -- our legislative counsel here see as a potential problem through their reading but not ask that laws be disallowed simply by executive fiat," Gibbs said.
"Gibbs accused the former administration of issuing "hundreds and hundreds" of signing statements whose purpose was to "disregard portions of legislation or the intent of Congress."
In his directive, Mr. Obama said that any signing statement issued before his presidency should be viewed with doubt, placing an asterisk beside all of those issued by Mr. Bush and other former presidents."
“To ensure that all signing statements previously issue are followed only when consistent with these principles, executive branch departments and agencies are directed to seek the advice of the Attorney General before relying on signing statements issued prior to the date of this memorandum as the basis for disregarding, or otherwise refusing to comply with , and provision of a statute,” President Obama wrote.
No comments:
Post a Comment