"Signing statements"

Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo takes aim at President Bush's frequent use - and abuse - of "signing statements", which our Emperor in Chief contends grant him the authority to ignore the legislative intent of any Congressional Bill he doesn't particularly like. This hubris was most recently on display in Mr. Bush's signing of the Defense Bill, and his pointed waffling on the McCain Amendment denouncing torture.

Mr. Marshall writes:

Again, the idea seems to be here to allow the president his own version of legislative intent, to imbed what he thinks the law means into the record, presumably for future courts to take into consideration or to justify at some later point how he chooses to implement the law.

But... the president's understanding of the law or interpretation of it is irrelevant. Indeed, to imagine that this is not so turns the whole structure of our government on its head.

Congress makes laws. The president has all sorts of power invested in him by the discretion he has in enforcing the laws. But what the laws are, what they mean, is entirely beyond his purview.

It's almost ludicrous to imagine that a man whose chief talent seems to be whacking weeds in Crawford could possibly interpret the law more effectively than those who crafted it in the first place. That President Bush insists on doing so is a clear sign of his belief in an Imperial Presidency, one which he comes closer to achieving with every passing day.