Re: Russia "no longer free"
- From: holman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Eugene Holman)
- Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:29:53 +0200
In article <1135780022.320175.132900@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"=?windows-1257?q?P=E7teris_Cedri=F2=F0_(Peteris_Cedrins)?="
<cedrins@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Eugene Holman wrote:
<deletions>
>
> These changes are analogous? Do you really think so? The government
> controls the media in the US?
No. But there are many power freaks in the US truling élite.
<deletions>
<quote>
NY Times
December 24, 2005
Editorial
Alito's Zeal for Presidential Power
With the Bush administration claiming sweeping and often legally baseless
authority to detain and spy on people, judges play a crucial role in
underscoring the limits of presidential power. When the Senate begins
hearings next month on Judge Samuel Alito, President Bush's Supreme Court
nominee, it should explore whether he understands where the Constitution
sets those limits. New documents released yesterday provide more evidence
that Judge Alito has a skewed view of the allocation of power among the
three branches - skewed in favor of presidential power.
One troubling memo concerns domestic wiretaps - a timely topic. In the
memo, which he wrote as a lawyer in the Reagan Justice Department, Judge
Alito argued that the attorney general should be immune from lawsuits when
he illegally wiretaps Americans. Judge Alito argued for taking a
step-by-step approach to establishing this principle, much as he argued for
an incremental approach to reversing Roe v. Wade in another memo.
The Supreme Court flatly rejected Judge Alito's view of the law. In a 1985
ruling, the court rightly concluded that if the attorney general had the
sort of immunity Judge Alito favored, it would be an invitation to deny
people their constitutional rights.
In a second memo released yesterday, Judge Alito made another bald proposal
for grabbing power for the president. He said that when the president signed
bills into law, he should make a "signing statement" about what the law
means. By doing so, Judge Alito hoped the president could shift courts'
focus away from "legislative intent" - a well-established part of
interpreting the meaning of a statute - toward what he called "the
President's intent."
In the memo, Judge Alito noted that one problem was the effect these signing
statements would have on Congressional relations. They would "not be warmly
welcomed by Congress," he predicted, because of the "novelty of the
procedure" and "the potential increase of presidential power."
These memos are part of a broader pattern of elevating the presidency above
the other branches of government. In his judicial opinions, Judge Alito has
shown a lack of respect for Congressional power - notably when he voted to
strike down Congress's ban on machine guns as exceeding its constitutional
authority. He has taken a cramped view of the Fourth Amendment and other
constitutional provisions that limit executive power.
The Supreme Court and the lower federal courts have had to repeatedly pull
the Bush administration back when it exceeded its constitutional powers.
They have made clear that Americans cannot be held indefinitely without
trial just because they are labeled "enemy combatants." They have vindicated
the right of Guantánamo Bay detainees to challenge their confinement. And
they will no doubt have to correct the Bush administration's latest
assertions of power to spy domestically. The Senate should determine that
Judge Alito is on the side of the Constitution in these battles, not on the
side of the presidency - which the latest documents strongly question -
before voting to confirm him.
</quote>
Regards,
Eugene Holman
.
- References:
- Russia "no longer free"
- From: lorad474
- Re: Russia "no longer free"
- From: idoc2_2004
- Re: Russia "no longer free"
- From: Eugene Holman
- Re: Russia "no longer free"
- From: Pēteris Cedriņš (Peteris Cedrins)
- Russia "no longer free"
- Prev by Date: Re: Russia "no longer free"
- Next by Date: On 'Nother Russia
- Previous by thread: Re: Russia "no longer free"
- Next by thread: Re: Russia "no longer free"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|