Ashcroft says judges threaten national security by questioning Bush decisions
One of the most disturbing trends in post-9.11 America is the belief that “Father knows best”…that George W. Bush, as a “firm and resolute” leader, should be allowed carte blance when it comes to conducting his never-ending War on Terror. What President Lowest Common Denominator wants, he should get. To question that is unpatriotic. Say what??
WASHINGTON - Federal judges are jeopardizing national security by issuing rulings contradictory to President Bush’s decisions on America’s obligations under international treaties and agreements, Attorney General John Ashcroft said Friday.
In his first remarks since his resignation was announced Tuesday, Ashcroft forcefully denounced what he called “a profoundly disturbing trend” among some judges to interfere in the president’s constitutional authority to make decisions during war.
“The danger I see here is that intrusive judicial oversight and second-guessing of presidential determinations in these critical areas can put at risk the very security of our nation in a time of war,” Ashcroft said in a speech to the Federalist Society, a conservative lawyers’ group….
….Ashcroft criticized rulings he said found “expansive private rights in treaties where they never existed” that run counter to the broad discretionary powers given the president by the Constitution.
“Courts are not equipped to execute the law. They are not accountable to the people,” Ashcroft said.
Apparently, neither is this President. This shameless attempt to imply that the federal judiciary should somehow be subservient to Presidential whims is absurd. You’d think that the Attorney General of the United States would have at least a rudimentary understanding of the system of checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution. Or is it acceptable for Conservatives to ignore the Constitution when it proves to be an impediment to their policy goals?
Of course, the fact that said Presidential determinations may contravene the Constitution, or federal law, or both seems somehow completely beside the point. If we win the War on Terror, and yet we do it in a way that betrays what we stand for as a people, have we REALLY won anything at all?
Remember, loose lips sink ships….
