Federal court upholds President's authority

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Little-Acorn, Aug 24, 2006.

  1. Little-Acorn
    Online

    Little-Acorn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,366
    Thanks Received:
    2,024
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings:
    +5,862
    Here's a rare headline.

    We need a few more judicial appointments, of more people who believe the Constitution is something to be obeyed rather than evaded, to make headlines like this more common.

    -------------------------------

    http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/8/24/151655.shtml?s=lh

    Federal Court Uphold President's Authority

    Friday, Aug. 25, 2006

    A federal appeals court Thursday upheld the president's authority to regulate financial transactions with foreign countries during a security crisis and rejected a challenge by a man prosecuted for sending $100,000 into Iraq.

    The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the first President Bush made proper use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act after Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990.

    The court rejected a claim that invoking the act unfairly let the president create new criminal offenses that should only be authorized by Congress.

    In an opinion explaining their decision, the judges said Congress has the authority to delegate some of its power to the president, especially in matters of foreign affairs, and noted that in a similar case, the Supreme Court upheld the president's power to criminalize the sale of weapons to certain countries.
     
  2. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,555
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,432
    Somewhat interesting. But I'd have made the same decision if I were the Judge hearing the case. Daddy Bush didn't really have a reputation for trying to evade Congressional authority or assert unchecked executive power, though.

    All judges are pretty political. And what you're actually saying is you want more judges who agree with YOU....same as everyone else.

    Perhaps you'll find this interesting:

    http://www.answers.com/topic/strict-constructionism
     

Share This Page