Bush Moves Towards Martial Law - DEBUNKED [ more meaningless? djf]
David Farber <[email protected]> Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:09:02 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.culture.people.interesting-people |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Begin forwarded message: From: Seth Finkelstein <[email protected]> Date: October 31, 2006 2:07:16 PM EST To: David Farber <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected], Jeff Faria <[email protected]> Subject: Bush Moves Towards Martial Law - DEBUNKED Much analysis here: http://www.discourse.net/archives/2006/10/ crazy_times_martial_law_edition.html "Laws like this are always troubling because there is no practical way to challenge their application. Unless it were willing to strike down the statute as a standardless delegation - a nearly moribund doctrine - it is very hard to see a court telling the President that, say, the chaos in New Orleans after the flood, or even the limited violence in Florida in 2000 when GOP operatives attacked the ballot counters, didn't rise to a level that "opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws." The courts are going to label that a political question, or find some other excuse for the courts to duck the matter. But while this sort of executive discretion is always a problem for democratic rule, as I hope I've shown by juxtaposing the old language and the new it's not a new problem, not at all. " -- Seth Finkelstein Consulting Programmer http://sethf.com Infothought blog - http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/ Interview: http://sethf.com/essays/major/greplaw-interview.php