Category: Constitution

I Was Expecting This

No Comments

ACORN has filed suit in Federal Court against the Defund ACORN Act, claiming that it is an unconstitutional bill of attainder.

Well, duh, it is an unconstitutional bill of attainder, as it says clearly in the bill:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘Defund ACORN Act’.

I figure that any judge with two braincells strike this struck down in about 15 minutes.

Of course, both Bushes and Reagan appointed a lot of folks who lacked the requisite two brain cells, so we will see how it goes.

OK, This is Just Scary

No Comments

Some of Bush’s executive power legal opinions have been released.

They are so extreme that started walking it back in October of 2008, and they effectively repealed them on January 15, 2009.

The short version of the opinions is that, “All your constitution are belong to us.”

We are talking about suspension of the 4th amendment and 1st amendment completely.

Why John Yoo still has a law license, much less a teaching position at UC Berkeley, is astonishing.

[updated]
As Glenn Greenwald notes:

The essence of this document was to declare that George Bush had the authority (a) to deploy the U.S. military inside the U.S., (b) directed at foreign nationals and U.S. citizens alike; (c) unconstrained by any Constitutional limits, including those of the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments. It was nothing less than an explicit decree that, when it comes to Presidential power, the Bill of Rights was suspended, even on U.S. soil and as applied to U.S. citizens. And it wasn’t only a decree that existed in theory; this secret proclamation that the Fourth Amendment was inapplicable to what the document calls “domestic military operations” was, among other things, the basis on which Bush ordered the NSA, an arm of the U.S. military, to turn inwards and begin spying — in secret and with no oversight — on the electronic communications (telephone calls and emails) of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil.

And the villagers inside the Beltway still see no need for an investigation.

Yes

No Comments

Glenn Greenwald asks, “Is Obama embracing the lawless, omnipotent executive?” by endorsing a position that the President, and the President alone has the authority to determine what classified documents it must release under court order.

This has been another episode of simple answers to simple questions. (apologies to Atrios)

It’s disgraceful, but not unsurprising. After all, how often do you see an executive voluntary give up authority that a predecessor successfully asserted?

Bush Court Confirms: Voting While Black is a Offense

No Comments

They voted 6-3 to uphold Indiana’s voter discrimination identification law.

It was actually 3 opinions each supported by 3 justices, and some legal analysts claim that there is hope, since one of the concurring opinions asked for evidence of voter disenfranchisement, but I see that as a vain hope.

While I see Stephens ruling against the law if there is evidence, it is telling that there is no evidence of the sort of vote fraud that the law was intended to prevent having ever occurred in Indiana, and I see Roberts and Kennedy simply moving a bit to the right each time that such a challenge occurs.

US Iraqi Occupation Deal Not Near Resolution

No Comments

It appears that US and Iraqi negotiators have yet to resolve significant issues involved an occupation enabling agreement, in which Bush and His Evil Minions™ have been attempting an end run on the constitutional requirement that treaties require Senate approval to create an “Iraq forever” framework.

The sticking points appear to be:

  1. The immunity of the US military from Iraqi law.
  2. The immunity of the US contractors from Iraqi law.
  3. The authority to order raids.
  4. The authority to detain suspects.

If you look at these, these are questions of basic sovereignty, and the US wants nothing to do with real power to an Iraqi governing body.

This setback is a very good thing for the US and for Iraq. Neither benefits from continuing occupation.

Constitutional Issue for Bush and His Evil Minions™ “Iraq Forever” Plan

No Comments

Bush’s intent to make permanent and binding security arrangements with Iraq without congressional approval do appear to be unprecedented.

There were formal treaties for Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia, New Zealand, and NATO, and when Reagan entered into security arrangements with Micronesia and the Marshall Islands, this was submitted to the congress for approval.

You know it’s out there when Dana Freaking Rohrabacher is saying that this is “arrogant”.

Bush to Renominate War Criminal to DoJ Position

No Comments

Stephen J. Bradbury wrote the memoranda that authorized torture, and so the Senate has refused to confirm, but George W. Bush, in a fit of pique I guess, has decided that there are not enough war criminals in the Department of Justice, so he’s sending him back again.

If there is a level of lawlessnesses that demands impeachment, it was reached some time ago, and by not addressing this with an investigation, the Congress is ignoring their constitutional responsibility.

NOT ON THE TABLE! NOT ON THE TABLE!

Democrats Move to Prevent Bush From Encumbering Next President on Iraq

No Comments

Honestly, I don’t see these going anywhere, because of the gutless leadership in the House and Senate, but Representative Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) have introduced bills prohibiting the Bush administration from entering into a binding security arrangement with Iraq. They require the President to follow Article II of the constitution, and get the “advice and consent” of the Senate.

You can see the House version here.

FWIW, it should be introduced once a month leading up to election day, just to make Republicans vote for the war, over, and over, and over again.

For the life of me, with a substantial majority of Republicans wanting a pullout, and a president who is less popular than the idea of Britney Spears* as a baby sitter, that the Republican delegation continues to back this failed war of a failed president.

They are drowning, and they are throwing themselves an anvil, and calling it water wings.

*Yes, I know that I have promised not to mention They Who Must Not Be Named, but this is not a discussion of her, rather an invocation.

Bush Pocket Veto of Troops Pay Raise is Invalid

No Comments

I understand that Bush is threatening a veto of the latest defense authorization bill.

It appears that inconveniencing banks means more to him than giving our troops the payraise they deserve.

That being, this rather insightful analysis is correct: If he wants to do this, then he has to put his name on the veto with those crayons sharpies that he is so fond of. He cannot use the pocket veto, because Congress is still technically in session.

The Senate has remained in session to prevent recess appointments, and as such his claim, “The adjournment of the Congress has prevented my return of H.R. 1585 within the meaning of Article I, section 7, clause 2 of the Constitution”, is completely without merit.

If you really find this provision so bad, stop behaving like what Ahnuld would call a “Girlie Man”, and put your name on a veto that cuts pay for the troops.

Don’t worry, it’s not like any or your kids will be affected.

Good News: The Constitution Applies to Gays Too

No Comments

Oklahoma has a lay which forbids recognition of gay adoptions. The federal court of appeals struck down down the law. It violates the U.S. Constitution’s Full Faith and Credit Clause, which requires states to honor one another’s judicial judgments, including adoptions.

Good news. The law was mean spirited, Un-American, and probably got the full endorsement of both the Taliban and Al-Queida.

What Jonathan Singer Said

No Comments

He comments on the fact that Democratic investigations in the House and Senate have had the side effect of slowing the approvals of Bush Judicial Nominees.

However, an article on the front page of Wednesday’s Washington Post penned by Jerry Markon perhaps adds to the case that the investigations into Gonzales and the administration, more broadly, are bringing benefits — tangentially related, but related nonetheless — both to the Democratic Party and to the progressive movement. Specifically, as the Senate Judiciary Committee works on these and other investigations, it is not taking up potential judicial nominees sent to Capitol Hill by President Bush.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, long considered one of the nation’s most conservative appellate courts, is shifting to a moderate direction with the balance up for grabs. A growing list of vacancies — now five — has left the court evenly divided between Republican and Democratic appointees.

With an election year approaching, experts predict the court will tilt decisively to the left if Democrats keep control of Congress and reclaim the White House.

“There is a very good chance that this court will be solidly Democratic for many, many years,” said Arthur D. Hellman, a University of Pittsburgh law professor. He said the current 5-5 split — which began July 17 when Judge H. Emory Widener Jr., a Republican appointee, took semi-retirement — is “tremendously significant.”

To clarify, I’m not arguing that the Democrats pursue investigations of spurrious charges in order to slow the confirmation of ultra-conservative jurists. Far from it. But at the same time, the positive consequences that have come out of the fact that the Congress has been holding the Bush administration’s feet to the fire are not limited to a few subpoenas here and there, a few resignations here and there, and the truth beginning to come out. And if, as a result of these investigations appellate courts around the country do not shift to the right — or even shift to the left, as this article seems to indicate is the case with the fourth circuit — that’s not necessarily a bad thin.

Well said.

Bush to Congress: Drop Dead

No Comments

The Bush admin has denied a congressman whose responsibility is to oversee homeland security access to the White House’s emergency plans.

Congressman Denied Access To Post-Attack Continuity Plans
By JEFF KOSSEFF
Image
Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore. (Photo by Faith Cathcart)
c.2007 Newhouse News Service

WASHINGTON — Constituents called Rep. Peter DeFazio’s office, worried there was a conspiracy buried in the classified portion of a White House plan for operating the government after a terrorist attack.

As a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, DeFazio, D-Ore., is permitted to enter a secure “bubbleroom” in the Capitol and examine classified material. So he asked the White House to see the secret documents.

On Wednesday, DeFazio got his answer: DENIED.

“I just can’t believe they’re going to deny a member of Congress the right of reviewing how they plan to conduct the government of the United States after a significant terrorist attack,” DeFazio said.

….

This is how Bush and his Evil Minions™ operate. Even if congress has a constitutional right to review such things as a part of the budget process, give no information.

It’s a fundamentally unproductive policy, as this secrecy reinforces the idea that the Bush administration has plans for implementing martial law.