READINGS

Here's a few books and magazine articles. Just follow the links and they will take you right to the source.

1. "The Problem With Presidential Signing Statements" by John W. Dean

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=/dean/20060113.html

This article by former White House Counsel John W. Dean explore the abuse of Presidential signing statements, specifically by the current presidential administration. Presidential signing statements has allowed the current administration to essential sign a law, but uses the President own "interpretation" as a way to circumvent the core of the legislation.

By bypassing the intent of legislature, this allows the Executive Branch to essentially create Law, a function expressly given to the legislature in the Constitution.


2. "Clinton v. New York" Supreme Court Case (1998)

http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/97-1374.ZS.html

This is the text of the Supreme Court case that struck down the Line Item Veto Act of 1996. Essentially, the Act allowed the President (Clinton at that time) to strike out certain parts of legislation from Congressional laws. Although meant to cut out "pork" from bills, it was decided (rightly) that in essence, gave the President the same power to make or change law as Congress.

Once again, this weakens one branch of government while giving more power to another. Why bring it up now? Despite the ruling by the highest court of the land, the current President continues to ask Congress to pass the Line Item Veto act once again.


3. "Coercing Virtue: The World Wide Rule of Judges" Robert Bork*

http://www.amazon.com/Coercing-Virtue-Worldwide-Rule-Judges/dp/0844741620/ref=sr_1_1/002-4176507-9853647?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1177951126&sr=8-1

This book, written by noted Arch- Conservative Robert Bork, points to the oft feared term "Judicial Activism". In essence this means that the American courts (specifically the Supreme Court) essentially create law by ruling based on the concept of "Judicial Review".

Some point to Roe v. Wade as a height of Judicial Activism, while other use Bush v. Gore as an example. Both sides of the aisle has professed a fear of an "imperial court" and the fear is justified. If the courts have the power to create law, then they become more powerful than both the Executive and Legislative branches. It is for this reason, if nothing else, that Bork's book is worth a look.

* A short note: Yes I know Bork is a QUACK and I am most definitely not a fan. However, his writing on this topic I fell is informed and because this fear is echoed by both Conservatives and Liberals; I feel that it is worth a read.

4. "The Unitary Executive" Jennifer Van Burgen

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20060109_bergen.html

This article from FindLaw.com discusses the damage that the concept of a "Unitary Executive" can have on our Democratic system. The term, only recently coined, essentially lays out a concept where the Executive branch (i.e. the President) has most, if not all of the power as it relates to the other Branches of Government.

I won't belabor this point to much because it is obvious WHY this concept violates our separation of powers and is most definitely a serious breach of those barrier erected to protect the American people.