Gonzales sides with the written law over the President's intepretation...

[Journeyman]

The NY Times, in an article this morning titled In Limelight at Wiretap Hearing: 2 Laws, but Which Should Rule?, quotes A.G. Gonzales apparently putting the legal squeeze to Justice Alito's "Executive signing statements."

In trying to explain how the 2001 authorization to use force gives the President permission to conduct domestic surveilance in exception to the 1978 FISA law, Gonzales acknowledged that at least some members of Congress did not realize they were voting for a surveillance program when they voted for the force resolution.

"But we are a nation governed by written laws," Mr. Gonzales said, "not the unwritten intentions of individuals. What matters is the plain meaning of the statute passed by Congress and signed by the president. And in this case, those plain words could not be clearer."

I'm not a lawyer, but doesn't that exclude "signing statements" from having effect?


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/07/politics/07legal.html?ex=1139979600&en=7fc8fd4a183783a7&ei=5043&partner=EXCITE

[rfranklin]

1. Bush is the Unitarian President which means he has the Power to...

write, interpret and execute the Law as well as execute whoever looks cross-eyed at him.

[KharmaTrain]

2. Gonzo Didn't Read The Job Requirement

Attorney General is not the same as Couselor. His client is no longer boooshy boy, but the people of the United States...ALL of the people. This was the rap laid on Janet Reno when she refused to launch more witch hunts against the Clennis...and, as usual, the Repugnicans conveniently forget that fact when it doesn't serve their purposes.

This dude is playing advocate...a total miscariage of the role the chief law enforcement office of the country should be playing. He should be neutral and if this regime believes that torture and wiretapping "in a time of war" (which wasn't declared...screw the IWR) it should pay, on its own dime...and send up Harriet Meyers or some other regime toadie. Gonzo should do two things...first, appoint a special counsel to investigate if laws were broken and then resign.

[Inland]

3. It's merely a crock of shit that the plain language modifies FISA.

That's all. It's the principle that plain language controls over subjective intent, but there isn't a person in the world that could have possibly read, or could read, the IWR from excepting any type of spying from FISA. It's just that simple.

[Toots]

4. Ummm what about Presidnetial Papers Act. That is written law as well

Everyone turned their head when Bush* decided he needn't obey that law either. Where was all their indignation back then?