General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Please Tell Me More About How It Was Obama Who Failed To Close Gitmo [View all]Cha
(297,224 posts)snip//
"But the Bergdahl release has resurrected an attack from the anti-Gitmo left, the notion that, if the President can use a signing statement to justify the release of these five prisoners, then he can do so for all of the Gitmo detainees. If the President can ignore the law in this case, then why not do the same for the rest of the detainees? MSNBCs Chris Hayes asked that very question, on behalf of anti-Gitmo activists, on his All In program Monday night, but the premise of that question relies on the same fundamental misunderstanding about signing statements that the right relies on. Theyre both asserting that the President is using the signing statement to ignore the law. Here is what President Obama said about using signing statements in 2007, at a Montana town hall campaign event:
When Hayes played that clip last night, he cut it off when Obama said were not going to use signing statements, but the rest of that sentence is as a way of doing an end-run around Congress.
The Presidents NDAA signing statement doesnt do that, it seeks to preserve the will of Congress, with a very narrow, well-defined exception. The test of that exception isnt settled by the signing statement, it is settled by the U.S. Constitution, and if it is challenged, by the Supreme Court. No one has said that the Bergdahl swap would not withstand such a challenge, but a wholesale release of Gitmo detainees likely would not.
http://thedailybanter.com/2014/06/right-left-attack-obama-signing-statement-rationale-bowe-bergdahl-swap/