Please Mr. Postman
And now the U.S. Mail. Is anything left?
The New York Daily News reports, in W pushes envelope on U.S. spying:
President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans' mail without a judge's warrant, the Daily News has learned.
The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a "signing statement" that declared his right to open people's mail under emergency conditions.
That claim is contrary to existing law and contradicted the bill he had just signed, say experts who have reviewed it.* * * *"You have to be concerned," agreed a career senior U.S. official who reviewed the legal underpinnings of Bush's claim. "It takes Executive Branch authority beyond anything we've ever known." (Emphasis added)
The Boston Globe, which has led the way on the abuse by Bush of signing statements, Bush signing statement may allow mail opening without warrants, notes:
But when he signed the postal reform act, Bush added a statement saying that his administration would construe that provision "in a manner consistent, to the maximum extent permissible, with the need to conduct searches in exigent circumstances. ..."
"The signing statement raises serious questions whether he is authorizing opening of mail contrary to the Constitution and to laws enacted by Congress," said Ann Beeson, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union. "What is the purpose of the signing statement if it isn't that?"
* * * *
Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., criticized Bush's action.
"Every American wants foolproof protection against terrorism. But history has shown it can and should be done within the confines of the Constitution. This last-minute, irregular and unauthorized reinterpretation of a duly passed law is the exact type of maneuver that voters so resoundingly rejected in November," Schumer said.
The ACLU's Beeson noted that there has been an exception allowing postal inspectors to open items they believe might contain a bomb.
"His signing statement uses language that's broader than that exception," she said.
Bush uses the phrase exigent circumstances: "The question is what does that mean and why has he suddenly putting this in writing if this isn't a change in policy," she said.
* * * *
Bush has issued at least 750 signing statements during his presidency, more than all other presidents combined, according to the American Bar Association.
Typically, presidents have used signing statements for such purposes as instructing executive agencies how to carry out new laws.
Bush's statements often reserve the right to revise, interpret or disregard laws on national security and constitutional grounds.
"That non-veto hamstrings Congress because Congress cannot respond to a signing statement," ABA president Michael Greco has said. The practice, he added, "is harming the separation of powers."
And there is no way you will ever know, since there is no review (before or after) of what's been done (or read) by the Administration. This is the only notice (via the signing statement) that it could happen. As Marty Kaplan of the Huffington Post explained, in You've Got Mail. No, THEY'VE Got Mail. No, They've Got YOUR Mail.:
To read your first-class mail, all W needs to do is "construe" you. No judges, no criminal courts, no FISA warrants, no due process, nada.
Another day, another outrage from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
No comments:
Post a Comment