September 17, 2006
NIXON'S DEAD AND BURIED:
How the Presidency Regained Its Balance (JOHN YOO, 9/17/06, NY Times)
[T]he president has broader goals than even fighting terrorism — he has long intended to make reinvigorating the presidency a priority. Vice President Dick Cheney has rightly deplored the “erosion of the powers and the ability of the president of the United States to do his job†and noted that “we are weaker today as an institution because of the unwise compromises that have been made over the last 30 to 35 years.â€Thus the administration has gone to war to pre-empt foreign threats. It has data-mined communications in the United States to root out terrorism. It has detained terrorists without formal charges, interrogating some harshly. And it has formed military tribunals modeled on those of past wars, as when we tried and executed a group of Nazi saboteurs found in the United States.
To his critics, Mr. Bush is a “King George†bent on an “imperial presidency.†But the inescapable fact is that war shifts power to the branch most responsible for its waging: the executive. Harry Truman sent troops to fight in Korea without Congressional authority. George H. W. Bush did not have the consent of Congress when he invaded Panama to apprehend Manuel Noriega. Nor did Bill Clinton when he initiated NATO’s air war over Kosovo.
The Bush administration’s decisions to terminate the 1972 antiballistic missile treaty and to withdraw from the International Criminal Court and the Kyoto accords on global warming rested on constitutional precedents going all the way back to Abraham Lincoln.
The administration has also been energetic on the domestic front. It has re-classified national security information made public in earlier administrations and declined, citing executive privilege, to disclose information to Congress or the courts about its energy policy task force. The White House has declared that the Constitution allows the president to sidestep laws that invade his executive authority. That is why Mr. Bush has issued hundreds of signing statements — more than any previous president — reserving his right not to enforce unconstitutional laws.
A reinvigorated presidency enrages President Bush’s critics, who seem to believe that the Constitution created a system of judicial or congressional supremacy. Perhaps this is to be expected of the generation of legislators that views the presidency through the lens of Vietnam and Watergate. But the founders intended that wrongheaded or obsolete legislation and judicial decisions would be checked by presidential action, just as executive overreaching is to be checked by the courts and Congress.
Putting the Legislative branch in its place is all well and good, but the Executive really needs to confront the Judiciary if the proper checks and balances are to be restored. Posted by Orrin Judd at September 17, 2006 9:09 AM
It's telling that the Executive's pointman on this issue is a formidable legal scholar like Mr. Yoo, while the Left's spokesperson, Mr. Greenwald, is an expat living in Brazil, whose only legal claim to fame is his defense of a white supremist, and who has, apparently, allowed his membership at the bar to lapse.
Posted by: Jim in Chicago at September 17, 2006 2:40 PMI'm simply amazed that conservatives buy into the dual constitution theory (there's one for wartime, another for peacetime).
Posted by: jpe at September 17, 2006 4:45 PMjpe:
No, war is simply left to the Executive as part of the division of powers. Washington in particular had seen how disastrous it could be if the Legislative branch was left free to meddle.
Posted by: oj at September 17, 2006 4:53 PM