President/Executive Department Commons^™

Does Congress Have The Power To Limit The President's Conduct Of Detentions, Interrogations And Surveillance In The Context Of War?, Shayana Kadidal

City University of New York Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Political Balance Of Power Over The Military: Rethinking The Relationship Between The Armed Forces, The President, And Congress, Geoffery S. Corn, Eric Talbot Jensen

Faculty Scholarship

Recent events related to the planning and execution of the war in Iraq, most notably the perceived 2003 "firing" of then Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki, have raised concerns over the effect of Executive Branch dominance of the military and how that dominance impacts the ability of Congress to obtain timely and important information. Such actions, perceived to discourage members of the military from providing candid views to Congress when they differ with the Administration, even if implied instead of express, strike at the very core of the founder's intent to balance military power within the national government. The …

Rays Of Sunlight In A Shadow “War”: Foia, The Abuses Of Anti-Terrorism, And The Strategy Of Transparency, Seth F. Kreimer

All Faculty Scholarship

In the wake of the September 11 attacks, the “Global War on Terror” has marginalized the rule of law. From the dragnet detentions in the aftermath of the initial attacks, to novel and secretive surveillance authority under the Patriot Act, to the incarceration and torture of “enemy combatants,” the administration’s “war” has sought to establish zones of maneuver free of both legal constraint and of political oversight. In the first half decade of these efforts, the tripartite constitutional structure which is said to guard against executive usurpation remained largely quiescent. Opponents both inside and outside of the government turned instead …

A Wolf In Sheep’S Clothing: The Unilateral Executive And The Separation Of Powers, Thomas J. Cleary

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “The United States Constitution vests all executive powers in a president. This is the unitary executive theory. By virtue of this, many believe the president is vested with the power to act unilaterally. This is the unilateral executive theory. However, the unilateral executive portends more than action. In reality, the unilateral executive theory provides an opportunity to implement a unilateral agenda. Thus, the aim of this paper is to consider executive power, the separation of powers, and the unilateral executive theory to determine if presidential power under the separation of powers doctrine is actually “a wolf in sheep’s clothing.” …

Signing Statements And Divided Government, Neal Devins

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Introduction: The Last Word? The Constitutional Implications Of Presidential Signing Statements, Charlie Savage

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

A Matter Of Direction: The Reagan Administration, The Signing Statement, And The 1986 Westlaw Decision, Christopher S. Kelley

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The First Word, M. Elizabeth Magill

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The On/Off Switch, Philip Heymann

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Why The President Must Veto Unconstitutional Bills, Saikrishna B. Prakash

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Presidential Signing Statements In Perspective, Nelson Lund

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Unconstitutionality Of "Signing And Not-Enforcing", Michael B. Rappaport

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Litigating Presidential Signing Statements, Michele Estrin Gilman

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Presidential Signing Statements And Congressional Oversight, A. Christopher Bryant

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Signing Statements: Constitutional And Practical Limits, Louis Fisher

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Fee Shifting As A Congressional Response To Adventurous Presidential Signing Statements, Harold J. Krent

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Signing Statements And Statutory Interpretation In The Bush Administration, Neil Kinkopf

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

The Presidential Signing Statements Controversy, Ronald A. Cass, Peter L. Strauss

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Presidential Signing Statements And The Rule Of Law As An "Unstructured Institution", Peter M. Shane

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Signing Statements As Declaratory Judgments: The President As Judge, Phillip J. Cooper

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

International Law And Constitutional Interpretation: The Commander In Chief Clause Reconsidered, Ingrid Brunk Wuerth

Michigan Law Review

The Commander in Chief Clause is a difficult, underexplored area of constitutional interpretation. It is also a context in which international law is often mentioned, but not fully defended, as a possible method of interpreting the Constitution. This Article analyzes why the Commander in Chief Clause is difficult and argues that international law helps resolve some of the problems that the Clause presents. Because of weaknesses in originalist analysis, changes over time, and lack of judicial competence in military matters, the Court and commentators have relied on second-order interpretive norms like congressional authorization and executive branch practice in interpreting the …

Litigating Presidential Signing Statements, Michele E. Gilman

All Faculty Scholarship

In response to President George W. Bush's aggressive use of presidential signing statements, several members of Congress as well as a prominent Taskforce of the American Bar Association have proposed legislation to provide for judicial review of signing statements. These critics assert that the President must veto legislation with which he disagrees, rather than use signing statements to refuse to enforce statutes that he signs into law. This article explores whether Congress can litigate presidential signing statements, concluding that they are not justiciable even if Congress enacts a law granting itself standing to raise such a challenge. Congress might be …

Section 1: The Executive Power & The War On Terror, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

Congress's Transformative Republican Revolution In 2001-2006 And The Future Of One-Party Rule, Charles Tiefer

All Faculty Scholarship

In 2001 - 2006, Republican leadership in the legislature circumvented procedural norms to implement an ideological agenda that precluded the minority party from making alternative proposals and voicing criticisms. With the Republican majority in the Senate falling to 50-50 in 2000, President Bush's assumption of office, despite having lost the popular vote, set the tone for what would become an era of illegitimate procedural reform cloaked in secrecy and deniability. Through closed-door conferences and closed-rules, Republican leadership in the House and Senate turned the clock back on civil liberties, passed unfavorable and convoluted tax cuts, and used transformed health care …

Youngstown, Hamdan, And "Inherent" Emergency Presidential Policymaking Powers, Gordon G. Young

Faculty Scholarship

This brief article explores the contribution that Hamdan v Rumsfeld may have made to clarifying what should happen in the large interstices of the rules created by the Youngstown case for determining the validity of claims of Presidential power. It offers its own view of the scope of Presidential powers in extreme emergencies involving the incapacitation of the legislative branch.

Slides: Forest And Rangeland Planning, Nepa Analysis And Decisions, Glenn Casamassa

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Glenn Casamassa, Forest Supervisor, Arapahoe-Roosevelt National Forest

17 slides

Slides: Nepa And Public Participation In Grazing Management On Federal Public Lands: The 40-Year Struggle, Joe Feller

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Joe Feller, College of Law, Arizona State University

22 slides

Slides: Forests And Grasslands, Federico Cheever

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Professor Federico Cheever, University of Denver Sturm College of Law

30 slides

Currents In Water Resources Law And Policy: How Is “Prior” Coping With New Stresses? [Outline], A. Dan Tarlock, David H. Getches

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

3 pages.

Includes bibliographical references

"A. Dan Tarlock, Distinguished Professor of Law and Director, Program in Environmental and Energy Law, Chicago-Kent College of Law"

"David H. Getches, Dean and Raphael J. Moses Professor of Natural Resources Law, University of Colorado Law School"

A Decade Of Colorado Supreme Court Water Decisions, 1996-2006: Special Report, Colorado Foundation For Water Education

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Justice Greg Hobbs, Colorado Supreme Court

31 pages.

Includes color illustrations and map

"Acknowledgments: This special report highlights important features of Colorado Supreme Court water decisions handed down between 1996 and 2006. It contains excerpts from opinions authored by Justices Lohr, Vollack, Mullarkey, Kourlis, Hobbs, Martinez, Bender, Rice, Coats and Eid. It is adapted from an article that first appeared in The Water Report (www.thewaterreport.com), February 15, 2007, used with permission."