|
|
|
|
|
Bush needs a reminder: Law applies to him, too David Broder / Washington Post | July 10 2006 Justice John Paul Stevens, the author of the majority opinion in the historic decision on Guantanamo detainee trials, was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1975 by President Gerald R. Ford. Had there been no Supreme Court decision ordering Richard Nixon to turn over the White House tapes that led to his own resignation, Ford would never have been in a position to appoint Stevens — or anyone else — to judicial office. It was that first Supreme Court decision requiring Nixon to turn over the incriminating evidence of his complicity in the Watergate cover-up that set the tone — if not the precedent — for the 5-3 decision Stevens wrote, telling the president he could not try Osama bin Laden’s former driver before a commission of military officers because Congress had passed no law authorizing such commissions or regulating such trials. Once again, the chief executive had to be reminded that he is not above the law. No more than the security threats Nixon invented in order to justify his rogue police-state operations will the war on terror relieve the president of the burden imposed by the Constitution to “faithfully execute the laws.” He can’t just make them up to suit his convenience. For anyone who was worried that the United States was in danger of losing its precious freedoms as it mobilized to combat the threat of Islamic terrorism, the Stevens opinion was the best possible Independence Day gift. The Supreme Court that helped install Bush in the presidency when it cut off the re-count of Florida votes sent him a clear message that he must operate in ways that Congress and the Constitution permit. I am delighted that Republican congressional leaders say they hope to turn the ruling to their advantage by engaging the Democrats in a lively debate about the president’s counterterrorism strategy. That debate is long overdue. In the first reaction to the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress gave Bush broadly worded authority to protect the country and strike back at the terrorists. After that, it paid little attention for the next four years to the way that authority was being used. It was only in the past year — when the first anti-terrorism statute, the Patriot Act, came up for renewal and when newspapers disclosed some of the steps the administration had secretly taken — that Congress began to raise questions. Now, the court has plainly said to Congress and the administration, “You have to bring these proceedings under the law. We’re not telling you what the law should be, but you have to have some rules that are written into statutes — and conform to the standards the Constitution sets.” There is no reason for Democrats in Congress to fear the coming debate. They need not feel embarrassed about affirming the rightness of Stevens’ decision and finding ways to legislate the needed rules for handling these detainees. Congress is coming late to this task, but it is not too late to make our laws and our practices conform to the Constitution. And to remind this president that the law applies to him, too. ---------------------------------------------------
Prison Planet.tv: The Premier Multimedia Subscription Package: Download and Share the Truth! Please help our fight against the New World Order by giving a donation. As bandwidth costs increase, the only way we can stay online and expand is with your support. Please consider giving a monthly or one-off donation for whatever you can afford. You can pay securely by either credit card or Paypal. Click here to donate. |
