This spun off an earlier debate between Reynolds and Josh Marshall, about Ashcroft's jealous refusal to allow the FBI to check whether its terrorist suspects were on record as having purchased guns. Reynolds, using his skills as a law prof, cited chapter and verse from the relevant statutes to argue that if he wanted to follow current law, Ashcroft didn't have a choice.
But respect for the letter of the law hasn't otherwise been a hallmark of the Bush administration. Consider, for instance, the Presidential Records Act, which requires certain documents to be released after twelve years. The administration has issued an order which essentially negates the act by fiat, allowing a former or current President to withhold records indefinitely. (If you want to know why that's a big deal, look here). And there was also that 200-page set of changes to current law that got rammed through Congress so fast that some of the people voting on the bill complained that they never got to read it, which could surely have addressed the issue if it was going to be an obstacle.
As long as I'm on the subject, Sgt. Stryker has a few interesting thoughts about folks whose deep veneration for the Constitution starts and ends with the second amendment...
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home