Says today's Washington TIMES:
--------
| Opponents -- including many Democrats, some Republicans and several constitutional scholars -- decry the administration's move as an abuse of executive power and argue that the covert program is illegal. They say that the "checks and balances" framework of the Constitution requires the president to seek and win congressional approval before conducting such an operation. "This is one of the most serious constitutional crises that we've ever faced in the country," said Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor. Mr. Turley said the president's claim of executive authority based on Article II "would put our system on a slippery slope." "There's no limiting principle to that theory. The president inevitably ends up a maximum leader in a system of limited powers," he said. |
If you favor the presidents ability to act unfettered in wartime, Turley's objection is one that still must be answered. Under this theory of presidential power, what would be the limiting factor? I'm with Turley - there is none. And that my friends is a terrifying prospect.
Good people better rise up!
--------
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: LEGAL SCHOLARS SPLIT ON WIRETAPS?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blog.alexwhalen.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/629
Subscribe to this blog's feed
Leave a comment