Got a hot tip?
Drop us a line!

Subscribe

Links:

Site search

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

  • Hanlon: "Understood! And you do make an excellent point. Blag’s within his authority to appoint the guy,..."
  • Dormilona: "P.S. My fury was aimed at the source article (the one on the link) NOT at your commentary, Hanlon!"
  • Dormilona: "My New Year’s Resolution: Shut up and get a life. Just something to “work towards.” *_*"
  • Dormilona: "What infuriates me is that the paragraph (”The dispute had taken on racial..."
  • Rechan: "I don’t have resolutions. I know they’re a bunch of bull. Not the desire to improve is useless,..."

 

November 2006
M T W T F S S
« Oct   Dec »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Archives

Older Articles

Another judicial smackdown for Bush

by Hanlon on November 28, 2006 at 9:32 pm

Stories like this restore my faith in America’s powers of reason. A federal judge has ruled that Bush’s claim that he can blacklist any groups he wants by calling them “terrorists” is unconstitutional.

The Humanitarian Law Project had challenged Bush’s order, which blocked all the assets of groups or individuals he named as “specially designated global terrorists” after the 2001 terrorist attacks.

“This law gave the president unfettered authority to create blacklists,” said David Cole, a lawyer for the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Constitutional Rights that represented the group. “It was reminiscent of the McCarthy era.”

She also struck down the provision in which Bush had authorized the secretary of the treasury to designate anyone who “assists, sponsors or provides services to” or is “otherwise associated with” a designated group.

A lot of Bush’s presidency seems to center around him being allowed to do whatever he damn well pleases whenever he damn well pleases. He wants to be able to name anyone he so chooses a “terrorist”, wants to be able to spy on them with no need for a warrant or oversight, and wants to be allowed to declare wars without Congress.

One of the beautiful parts about America is that for the most part, no one is allowed to do anything on a whim. The country is structured so any such measures require someone else’s approval and can be turned over to someone else in the event of a disagreement. But that’s not how Dubya wants it. I applaud any judge who strikes this crap down.

Comments

Comment from Brad
Time November 29, 2006 at 11:18 am

How dare these damn activist judges try to protect our constitutional rights?

Comment from Hanlon
Time November 29, 2006 at 1:48 pm

Seriously, isn’t that awful? These radical liberal judges keep on making decisions based on the letter of the law, we need someone to talk some sense into these guys!

Write a comment