Signing Statements Ongoing Controversy
The ongoing controversy about signing statements arose concerning the extensive use of signing statements by the President G.W.Bush to modify the meaning of law. The written pronouncement issued by the President upon signing of the bill into law is known as signed statement. The American Bar Association in 2006 opposed the use of signing statements to modify the meaning of law describing it as contrary to the rule of law against the constitutional system of separation of powers.
The presentment clause gives president the power to veto a law or sign it in its entirety. Article II section3 states that the executive” take care that the laws be faithfully executed”. As such no US constitution provides with a common law principle, explicitly permitting or prohibiting signing statements. Signing statements may become more important than the text itself as it gives directions regarding the interpretation and implementation of the law but do not appear to have any legal force by themselves.
Proponents of the signing statements argue that they should be considered as a part of the legislative history as they reflect the executive’s position in negotiating with the congress. However the opponents of the theory believe that only congress may make law and the executive’s view of the law cannot be considered constitutionally part of the legislative history. President Bush has signed more statements than the total number of the signed statements by all the presidents of US.
The Supreme Court of the United States has not clearly addressed the limits of the signing statements.
USA Election Polls is a premiere advertiser. Visit their website. Thank you! |
