You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #78: "they have made their decision, now let them enforce it". [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-09-07 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
78. "they have made their decision, now let them enforce it".
see Andrew Jackson. Bush could simply choose to ignore the Supreme Court decision.

the signing statements are the Executive Branch's interpretation of how laws will be enforced. My understanding of the signing statements is that provisions of the passed law violate the authority as President granted under the Constitution then he will not enforce or enact those provisions.

signing statements:

In each of the last three Administrations, the Department of Justice has advised the President that the Constitution provides him with the authority to decline to enforce a clearly unconstitutional law.(7) This advice is, we believe, consistent with the views of the Framers.(8) Moreover, four sitting Justices of the Supreme Court have joined in the opinion that the President may resist laws that encroach upon his powers by "disregard them when they are unconstitutional." Freytag v. C.I.R., 111 S. Ct. 2631, 2653 (1991) (Scalia, J., joined by O'Connor, Kennedy and Souter, JJ., concurring in part and concurring in judgment).(9)

If the President may properly decline to enforce a law, at least when it unconstitutionally encroaches on his powers, then it arguably follows that he may properly announce to Congress and to the public that he will not enforce a provision of an enactment he is signing. If so, then a signing statement that challenges what the President determines to be an unconstitutional encroachment on his power, or that announces the President's unwillingness to enforce (or willingness to litigate) such a provision, can be a valid and reasonable exercise of Presidential authority.(10) And indeed, in a recent decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Federal Election Comm'n v. NRA Political Victory Fund, supra, the court cited to and relied upon a Presidential signing statement that had declared that a Congressionally-enacted limitation on the President's constitutional authority to appoint officers of the United States was without legal force or effect. Id. at * 11.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Pelosi threat to sue Bush over Iraq bill whopis01  May-08-07 10:03 PM   #0 
  - That's a bad (though well intended) move.  bluestateguy   May-08-07 10:06 PM   #1 
  - Simple  LiberalFighter   May-08-07 10:11 PM   #3 
  - not a bad plan n/t  whopis01   May-08-07 10:12 PM   #4 
  - So doable.  aquart   May-08-07 10:16 PM   #5 
  - Have Congress NOT pass a bill, force Bush to end the occupation/war  Tom Joad   May-08-07 10:24 PM   #9 
  - Or a simple signing statement forcing the retirement of the following:  HawkeyeX   May-08-07 10:38 PM   #11 
  - Make sure O'Connor is included and do Rehnquist in absentia  LiberalFighter   May-08-07 10:50 PM   #14 
     - They can't do Rehnquist, can they?  badgerpup   May-09-07 12:13 AM   #39 
     - Then remove him and his wife from Arlington National Cemetery!  LiberalFighter   May-09-07 10:48 AM   #79 
     - and make rehnquist's rulings null and void because he was a  orleans   May-09-07 12:16 PM   #81 
  - Often forgotten about FDR's court packing plan is this  bluestateguy   May-08-07 10:45 PM   #12 
  - Extreme times call for extreme measures. n/t  whopis01   May-08-07 10:49 PM   #13 
  - Packing the court is where I got the idea.. remembered from my history classes  LiberalFighter   May-08-07 10:51 PM   #15 
  - That's a beautiful plan  tavalon   May-09-07 05:26 AM   #46 
     - But but but  bearfan454   May-09-07 10:29 AM   #77 
  - Show their true colors.  alittlelark   May-09-07 12:09 AM   #37 
  - it's a start  peacebird   May-08-07 10:07 PM   #2 
  - LOL  magellan   May-08-07 10:16 PM   #6 
  - I used to actually believe that could happen.  whopis01   May-08-07 10:19 PM   #7 
  - Me too.  magellan   May-08-07 10:56 PM   #19 
     - Here's another idea for you...  whopis01   May-08-07 11:02 PM   #20 
     - That is good  magellan   May-08-07 11:09 PM   #23 
     - I have to admit  whopis01   May-08-07 11:15 PM   # 
     - Well, if things were run as they should be I'd agree with you  magellan   May-08-07 11:20 PM   #28 
     - that is true...  whopis01   May-08-07 11:29 PM   #31 
        - Hang onto your idealism and your humanity  magellan   May-08-07 11:34 PM   #33 
           - Thanks  whopis01   May-09-07 12:21 AM   #40 
     - I'll go one further  tavalon   May-09-07 05:30 AM   #47 
     - that is not a bad idea  whopis01   May-09-07 10:20 AM   #75 
     - I Want Them To Worry  momster   May-09-07 08:06 AM   #50 
     - Right and according to latest research 40% of those in the military endorse torture.  Toots   May-09-07 08:35 AM   #52 
        - *I* joined the military to get an education  magellan   May-09-07 08:41 AM   #54 
     - That wouldn't work  magellan   May-09-07 08:59 AM   #56 
     - No, not Congress - their children  JPettus   May-08-07 11:12 PM   #25 
        - Either way  magellan   May-08-07 11:15 PM   #26 
        - GWB Doesn't Care About Them Either  momster   May-09-07 08:16 AM   #51 
        - You can't force children  whopis01   May-09-07 10:27 AM   #76 
  - You can't win the impeachment battle right now  JPettus   May-08-07 11:02 PM   #21 
  - Comparing this to Clinton's impeachment  whopis01   May-08-07 11:09 PM   #22 
  - Thank you for your opinion  magellan   May-08-07 11:12 PM   #24 
  - Sometimes it's the ones least impressive that still carry weight  JPettus   May-08-07 11:20 PM   #29 
     - Honestly, these just aren't valid excuses  magellan   May-08-07 11:30 PM   #32 
     - Different Times, Different Republican Party  JPettus   May-09-07 03:42 AM   #43 
        - Anyone who's more worried about pissing off voters  magellan   May-09-07 08:35 AM   #53 
     - What do their claims matter?  whopis01   May-08-07 11:39 PM   #34 
        - You are focusing on the wrong part of my post  JPettus   May-09-07 03:43 AM   #44 
           - Your 'key' phrase had already been well disputed by others  whopis01   May-09-07 10:03 AM   #70 
  - You're comparing apples to oranges  tavalon   May-09-07 05:34 AM   #48 
     - Exactly!  whopis01   May-09-07 10:12 AM   #72 
  - If they had the votes... don't ya think they would ???  alittlelark   May-09-07 12:12 AM   #38 
     - What it takes is the courage of conviction  magellan   May-09-07 08:45 AM   #55 
  - About time someone took on this "signing statement" bullshit. I don't remember reading anything  Redstone   May-08-07 10:22 PM   #8 
  - Replace all of bushwad's pens with pens that use invisible ink  LiberalFighter   May-08-07 10:51 PM   #16 
     - I'm sure a crayon up the nose...  whopis01   May-08-07 10:53 PM   #18 
  - Interesting idea. An injunction against the signing statement might work.  tubbacheez   May-08-07 10:24 PM   #10 
  - It is a good idea... but  whopis01   May-08-07 10:52 PM   #17 
     - Yeah, I think Pelosi went too far with that quote.  tubbacheez   May-09-07 08:01 AM   #49 
  - silly Nancy: read what the US consitution says about signing statements - >  msongs   May-08-07 11:15 PM   #27 
  - Obviously she didn't read Bush's copy  whopis01   May-08-07 11:26 PM   #30 
  - So he's literally violating the Constitution with his signing statements.  Gregorian   May-08-07 11:55 PM   #36 
  - When your machine's repair is halted by a piece that's stuck,  bleever   May-08-07 11:49 PM   #35 
  - See this DU post about "packing the Supreme Court" which we will probably  Peace Patriot   May-09-07 01:46 AM   #41 
  - WTF?! Take * to court?! Is that in lieu of Impeachment?!  TheGoldenRule   May-09-07 02:54 AM   #42 
  - They will never impeach him  whopis01   May-09-07 10:09 AM   #71 
  - Good try, Nancy, but impeachment is the only course to stop  Vidar   May-09-07 04:07 AM   #45 
  - Good luck  whopis01   May-09-07 10:13 AM   #73 
  - HIt the WH from all angles---yes, good plan  rodeodance   May-09-07 09:09 AM   #57 
  - Agreed-all angles. A very important part of this action is what it says  coffeenap   May-09-07 09:46 AM   #58 
     - Impeachment would say far more. n/t  whopis01   May-09-07 10:14 AM   #74 
  - Pelosi Threatens to Sue Bush Over Iraq Bill  Donnachaidh   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #59 
  - Go Madame Speaker!  Greeby   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #60 
  - Good! Take him to court on the 750+ other signing statements he's issued as well.  AndyA   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #61 
  - we will be the only ones to put our feet down.  alyce douglas   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #67 
  - Love it! I'm glad she has a plan. nt  babylonsister   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #62 
  - I know my view is counter to many vocal DU posters ..... but .....  Husb2Sparkly   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #63 
  - I think so too.  rosesaylavee   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #65 
  - Pelosi, Feingold, Reid, Conyers...boxing this little weasel in. Cutting off his escape routes..  paparush   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #64 
  - signing statements are a scourge  TexasLawyer   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #66 
  - At least it would expose them for who they are. n/t  whopis01   May-09-07 11:35 AM   #80 
  - Don't tell me that this: "This legislation is unconstitutional because  thereismore   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #68 
  - we have to apply more pressure, much more pressure.  alyce douglas   May-09-07 09:53 AM   #69 
     - and not let up till he is in jail. n/t  whopis01   May-09-07 02:17 PM   #82 
  - About Time  badgervan   May-09-07 06:44 PM   #83 
  - "they have made their decision, now let them enforce it".  Bacchus39   May-09-07 10:45 AM   #78 
  - Go Pelosi!  superconnected   May-09-07 06:57 PM   #84 

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC