Skip to main content

The Supreme Court's landmark 1803 decision in Marbury v. Madison established the power of judicial review: the Supreme Court's ability to strike down laws that it finds violate the Constitution. Marbury is generally considered the most important Supreme Court decision in history. Chief Justice Marshall wrote for a unanimous Court in Marbury that, "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."  In the intervening two centuries, the Supreme Court has come to be universally accepted as the final arbiter of the meaning of the Constitution. Until now. The pro-torture "compromise" recently approved by the Bush administration and those "courageous" Congressional Republicans (McCain, Warner, Graham) is nothing less than an attempt to destroy judicial review and give Bush, not the courts, the ultimate authority to interpret the Constitution. There's more after the fold:

The Supreme Court, in its historic decision less than three months ago in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, held that the kangaroo court "military commissions" that Bush established to try detainees at Guantanamo violate the Geneva Conventions. The new Republican-approved bill provides:

3) INTERPRETATION BY THE PRESIDENT.-- As provided by the Constitution and by this section, the President has the authority for the United States to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions . . . .

Note that language.  As provided by the Constitution, Bush "has the authority for the United States to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions." In other words, if Congress passes this monstrosity, and Bush signs it (the latter is a given), Congress and the President are agreeing that the Constitution gives Bush powers superior to those of the Supreme Court to interpret what the Geneva Conventions mean, and whether they apply.

That is horrible enough. It gets worse. Bush is attempting a direct attack on the principle, stated in Article III, section 1 of the Constitution, that the judicial power of the United States shall be vested in the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts, not the President. This bill appears to be the opening salvo in an attack on Marbury v. Madison and the very principle of judicial review.

Think I'm overstating things? Listen to what Press Secretary Tony Snow said at a press conference today:

[Eric Brewer]: But isn't it the Supreme Court that's supposed to decide whether laws are unconstitutional or not?

Tony: No, as a matter of fact the president has an obligation to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. That is an obligation that presidents have enacted through signing statements going back to Jefferson. So, while the Supreme Court can be an arbiter of the Constitution, the fact is the President is the one, the only person who, by the Constitution, is given the responsibility to preserve, protect, and defend that document, so it is perfectly consistent with presidential authority under the Constitution itself.

Since Tony Snow, as far as I know, is not a constitutional scholar, someone (David Addington?) must have written those lines for him.  Snow was quoting language from the last clause of Article II, section I of the Constitution, which states:

Before he enter on the execution of his office, [the President] shall take the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Bush, aided and abetted by his lackeys in Congress, is attempting to use his oath of office as the constitutional basis for a claim that he, not the courts, is the final interpreter of the Constitution!

I think this is scary as all hell. If you agree, please recommend this diary.

Originally posted to Frederick on Fri Sep 22, 2006 at 03:34 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site