Mukasey: Obama-Backed Feingold Bill is Unconstitutional
Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent (a TPM alum) spots one last attempt at relevancy from outgoing attorney general Michael Mukasey. It seems that the departing AG is not too fond of Sen. Russ Feingold's (D-WI) bill requiring Congress to be notified whenever any president is deemed exempt from laws by secret DoJ memos.
We mentioned the president-elect's approval of the Feingold plan on Monday, so it's unlikely that Mukasey's bluster about its constitutionality will have any effect. But for Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, this could be the start of something good. They'll eventually be taking up the nomination of Dawn Johnsen, Obama's stellar pick to head the DoJ's Office of Legal Counsel, and Johnsen's support for the Feingold bill could turn into a reason for conservatives to slow down her confirmation.
The less secrecy in the White House the better. It's not like the reported information would be released to the general public. Divulgences would go to Congresspeople, who already can examine classified information. It's not total transparency, but it is far better than letting the White House run amok.
January 14, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
As long as you're not pushing for the bidet-cam, I agree wholeheartedly.
OT - anybody else wondering where Helen Thomas' chair is going to be on Jan 21?
January 14, 2009 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
"bidet-cam" and "Helen Thomas' chair" makes for a rather unfortunate juxtaposition.
January 14, 2009 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, dear FSM, please let the senate repugs be stupid enough to try to challenge Johnsen on the constitutionality of keeping OLC memos secret. She'll filet 'em.
January 14, 2009 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think the GOP will fight for the (Bush-level) status quo or even less White House oversight now that a Dem is in office. They don't trust the sneaky librul, and neither do their constituent wing nuts.
Can you imagine Limbaugh trying to rally the wing nut fringe that Obama keeping such secret power is a good thing?
I just hope Obama and the Congress can bury it in so deep in law that the next Bush can't possibly dig it out and brush it aside.
January 14, 2009 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is no hole that deep, if the congress rolls over for instead of overseeing him.
January 14, 2009 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, NOW he's interested in the Constitution? What kind of upbringing or genetic makeup allows people to have such gall?
January 14, 2009 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mukasey is gearing up/fearing up for his new post as a senior jolly good fellow at the American Irrelevancy Institute. Maybe he'll pass out at the podium there.
January 14, 2009 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, if anyone's an expert on doing unconstitutional things, I guess it's Mukasey.
January 14, 2009 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, that's nice, but what if the next Republican President simply gets a new secret DOJ memo written that says that he doesn't have to comply with this law, and he also doesn't have to publicly announce that fact either?
The problem with the Bush 43 Administration's law-breaking isn't that there weren't laws, it's that Congress consistently refused to penalize him in any meaningful way for the laws he did break.
Republicans will not give Obama such a pass. I don't really think they should, either. The Democrats running Congress now are for the most part spineless.
January 14, 2009 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Am I the only one wondering when Mukasey became the 10th Supreme Court AJ?
January 14, 2009 8:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that was around the same time Cheney became a forth branch of Government.
January 14, 2009 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mukasey seems to have a belated concern for what's constitutional.
January 15, 2009 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who really gives a shit what he thinks. He has proven to be a Bush neocon, without a shred of independence or credibility. It is hard to imagine that Ashcroft may have been Bush's best AG!
January 15, 2009 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink