Wednesday, May 9, 2007

Pelosi Threatens Bush Administation on Signing Statements

Well, here's some clarity from the dems on signing statements (The Hill):

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is threatening to take President Bush to court if he issues a signing statement as a way of sidestepping a carefully crafted compromise Iraq war spending bill.

Pelosi recently told a group of liberal bloggers, “We can take the president to court” if he issues a signing statement, according to Kid Oakland, a blogger who covered Pelosi’s remarks for the liberal website

Also answered is my question on why individual members of congress haven't already sued BushCo on this:

Bruce Fein, who was a Justice Department official under President Reagan, said Democrats seeking to challenge a signing statement would have to try to give themselves standing before filing a lawsuit.

“You’d need an authorizing resolution in the House and Senate … to seek a declaratory judgment from the federal district court that the president, by issuing a signing statement, is denying Congress’s obligation to [hold a veto override vote],” Fein said.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) introduced legislation to that end last year, but the idea of a lawsuit has yet to gain traction in Congress.

I really hope that the dem leaders can convince their members to sue BushCo on this. I find the signing statement concept outrageous (and none more outrageous than Dubya's SS on the anti-torture bill) - even if Bubba did issue a few himself. Signing statements are not permitted in the constitution - if I understand this correctly.


JollyRoger said...

It's past time somebody addressed it. It's an impeachable offense, the way Chimpy has made up his own laws.

Tom Harper said...

I sure hope they take this to court. Signing statements might be legal but not the way Bush is using them. He's issued more of them than every past president put together.

Who Hijacked Our Country

Mentarch said...

... and so, that is indeed why Bush vetoed the first Iraq Appropriations bill, instead of using signing statements to bypass the deadline for tropp withdrawal in the bill - else, the Democratic-lead congress could have launched a legal challenge in the courts.

unfortunately, this is also why Da Commander Guy will veot the next Iraq bill to come, instead of using signing statements ...

Mentarch said...

Ack - typos!

troops (not tropp)

veto (not veot)


Larry said...

I hope Pelosi will finally do something beside talk.

The war is still raging and Pelosi still says no impeachment for all these hidden secrets that continue to come out.

Undeniable Liberal said...

Impeach These Motherfuckers Already!!

FunkyTown Fighter said...

I wish they would take that Bastard to court & try him with war-crimes and murder while he's there! I agree with U.L.

LET'S TALK said...

Impeachment is the only option this congress has.

This President will veto the next bill and issue one of his famous signing statements... side stepping the congress and the peoples will all together.

Ron said...

I'm with you on the impeachment score. Some had a poll posted showing 39% of Americans (including 42% of independents) favor impeaching Commander Guy and Darth.

That's a significantly higher share than Dubya's total support!

Ron said...

Snave said...

I agree... I can't wait for an inquiry into the signing statements. What Bush is doing goes against the Constitution, which has provisions for keeping the president from concentrating power in the executive branch at the expense of the Congress and judiciary. I would like the Supreme Court to issue a judgment on this particular Bush behavior before the GOP finds a way to get John Paul Stephens off the Court and replace him with some whacko.

Try the administration for war crimes, indeed! But Bush may have some plans in place to escape such a thing... It wasn't widely publicized, but for anyone who didn't hear about it, it's intriguing... check out Wonkette from 10/18/06: