http://balkin.blogspot.com/2006/01/so-much-for-presidents-assent-to.html
 
*So Much for the President's Assent to the McCain Amendment *

Marty Lederman

The President signed the Defense Appropriations bill on Friday. In his 
signing statement 
<http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051230-8.html> he did 
at least two notable things.

*First*, with respect to several provisions of the bill, the President 
signaled his intention to reserve his authority, as Commander in Chief, 
to ignore statutory mandates. These include provisions that require 
advance notice of congressional committees before the use of funds to 
initiate a special access program, a new overseas installation, or a new 
start program; and a "report and wait" provision that requires the 
President to wait 15 days after notifying six congressional committees 
before using certain appropriations to transfer defense articles or 
services to another nation or an international organization for 
international peacekeeping, peace enforcement, or humanitarian 
assistance operatio! ns.

Most importantly, *as to the McCain Amendment*, which would 
categorically prohibit cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of 
detainees by all U.S. personnel, anywhere in the world, the President wrote:

    The executive branch shall construe Title X in Division A of the
    Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the
    constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary
    executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the
    constitutional limitations on the judicial power, which will assist
    in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President,
    evidenced in Title X, of protecting the American people from further
    terrorist attacks.


Translation: I reserve the constitutional right to waterboard when it 
will "assist" in protecting the American people from terrorist attacks.

You didn't think Cheney and Addington were going to go down quietly, did 
you? (And this even though they took their opponents to the cleaners 
<http://balkin.blogspot.com/2005/12/mccain-amendment-ugly.html> by 
negotiating the Graham Amendments, which, by precluding substantial 
avenues of j! udicial review, are far more beneficial to their detention 
and interrogation policies than the McCain Amendment is detrimental.)

Questions of the hour: How, if at all, will McCain respond? And will 
these questions of presidential authority to ignore statutory 
restrictions on the conduct of war -- implicated as well in the current 
NSA wiretapping scandal 
<http://balkin.blogspot.com/2005/12/inherent-authority-to-violate-federal.html> 
-- be front and center in the upcoming Alito hearings?

*Second*, the President unsurprisingly signals that the Administration 
reads the Graham Amendments to cut off currently pending habeas cases, 
including most importantly the /Hamdan/ case that's now before the 
Supreme Court and the /Al Odah/ case (/Rasul/ on remand) that the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has under review:

    [G]iven the decision of the Congress reflected in subsections
    1005(e) and 1005(h) that the amendments made to section 2241 of
    title 28, United States Code, shall apply to past, *present*, and
    future actions, including applications for writs of habeas corpus,
    described in that section, and noting that section 1005 does not
    confer any constitutional right upon an alien detained abroad as an
    enemy combatant, the executive branch shall construe section 1005 to
    preclude the Federal courts from exercising subject matter
    jurisdiction over any *existing* or future action, including
    applications for writs of habeas corpus, described in section 1005.


What this means is that we're about to see a major battle in the Supreme 
Court, where the SG argues that the Court must dismiss the /Hamdan/ case 
and Hamdan's attorneys argue that the Graham amendment should be 
construed to preserve pending cases.

The language of the McCain and Graham Amendments is here 
<http://balkin.blogspot.com/2005/12/mccain-and-grahamlevinkyl-amendments.html>, 
from the Defense Authorization bill (which the President will sign in 
the next few days). As far as I can tell, the language is exactly the 
same in the Appropriations bill that the President signed on Friday.



-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------
Our efforts depend on donations from people like you. Directions
for donors are at     http://www.constitution.org/whatucando.htm
Constitution Society      7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757
512/374-9585   www.constitution.org  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Get your free digital certificate from http://www.thawte.com
----------------------------------------------------------------



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to