A Violation Of The Separation Of Powers
U.S. District Judge Audrey Collins is an activist judge who has decided that the President of the United States does not have the power to arrange foreign policy despite Article 2 Section 2 of the Constitution giving him many aspect of that power. She has applied the Bill of Rights to foreign organization when that bill is clearly intended to be applied only to American citizens and their decedents since it states in the preamble “secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity”.
Congress does have the power to regulate the Presidents exercise of the foreign policy power but in those cases when they have chosen not to and no treaty binds him then he has a free hand. Judge Collins did not display either regulation by Congress or a treaty that would forbid the President from declaring foreign organization terrorist organizations. She has instead violated the separation of powers by interfering between the President and his duty to negotiate with foreign powers.
She did this by stating that one part of the Patriot Act was so vague a person of average intelligence could not understand it. I question whether or not she even looked at a study which gave evidence that point was true. It is irrelevant since the Patriot Act just gave a power to Bush that was already his according to the U.S. Constitution. The most this vague section could do is regulate how he exercises that power and if it is so vague then he would be bound by that regulation.
If this had been a case of domestic organizations then the Fourth Amendment would have made it necessary for the President to get some kind of warrant to take the action he proposed. The assembly clause of the First Amendment would not of applied even then unless he was stopping the organization from meeting. I see no evidence he was doing that even with these foreign organizations.
Source 1 is article about Judge striking down President’s ability to declare foreign organizations to be terrorist organizations.
Source 2 is a second article with a different point of view about the Judges action.
Congress does have the power to regulate the Presidents exercise of the foreign policy power but in those cases when they have chosen not to and no treaty binds him then he has a free hand. Judge Collins did not display either regulation by Congress or a treaty that would forbid the President from declaring foreign organization terrorist organizations. She has instead violated the separation of powers by interfering between the President and his duty to negotiate with foreign powers.
She did this by stating that one part of the Patriot Act was so vague a person of average intelligence could not understand it. I question whether or not she even looked at a study which gave evidence that point was true. It is irrelevant since the Patriot Act just gave a power to Bush that was already his according to the U.S. Constitution. The most this vague section could do is regulate how he exercises that power and if it is so vague then he would be bound by that regulation.
If this had been a case of domestic organizations then the Fourth Amendment would have made it necessary for the President to get some kind of warrant to take the action he proposed. The assembly clause of the First Amendment would not of applied even then unless he was stopping the organization from meeting. I see no evidence he was doing that even with these foreign organizations.
Source 1 is article about Judge striking down President’s ability to declare foreign organizations to be terrorist organizations.
Source 2 is a second article with a different point of view about the Judges action.
posted by Kerwin | 9:00 PM
2 Comments:
The Patriot Act is perfectly Constitutional. The fuss being made over it is purely political and an attempt to get more votes.
It is irrelevant since the Patriot Act just gave a power to Bush that was already his according to the U.S. Constitution. ...exactly..good point and well written!
Post a Comment
<< Home