The US Constitution, Revisited

I'm feeling the need to repost this posting because not enough people saw it and it seems to be relevant, again.

One blogger has had enough. Bill Clinton lied about his sex life while under oath, an offense, while punishible, did not abdicate his duities as president specifically outlined by the constitution.

While there is much discussion regarding whether or not Bush's policies violate our civil rights, violate the liberties ascribed to american life, or the entirety of the 4th amendment (and the 9th, but who's counting), there is little discussion of President Bush's failure to uphold his constitutionally mandated responsibilities

US CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE III, Section 3.
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Regardless whether you are a liberal or a "strict constuctionist" there can be little interpretation of that last line. The president is mandated to see the laws of the United States faithfully executed. There is no exclusion for laws you find inconvienant in times of national crisis. In fact, our forefathers had quite a bit of experience with the necessity for such laws, yet the president upheld his duity.

When you find a law that is inconvienant, one you are supposed to execute, what recourse do you have? Funny you should ask, Article III mentions just such a situation:

Section. 1.

The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section. 2.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-- between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

Those guys thought of everything. So, if you are president, you are sworn to uphold the laws of the United States, and in the event you don't like the law, you can take it to the Supreme Court. Wait, there is something else in there as well ...

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority

Wait, what is that about treaties? You mean that the president cannot rule independantly that a treaty (such as the Geneva Conventions) no longer applies to the United States?

Article VI, Paragraph 2:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

So treaties are treated by the constitution as federal laws. And we already know the president is required to execute federal laws. So the president is required to uphold treaties as well as federal laws. If the president doesn't aggree with the treaty, much the same as a law, he needs to either take his case to the Senate where they can make decisions regarding treaties, or take it to the Supreme Court.

But what about times of national crisis and national security issues, and protecting the US Citizens. Nothing in the constitution gives the president any authority to make special exceptions to his constitutionally designated responsibilities. Nothing gives him the right to selectively violate United States law.

But what if you don't like the Supreme Court and the laws of Congress? Well, it seems that you aren't really a team player, but more of a monarch, which the constitution was designed to prevent. It even put in a clause for just such a person:

Article II, Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

There you have it. When the President, regardles of why he chooses to violate the laws of the United States, or fails to uphold our enforce treaties (i.e. Geneva) can loose his job just like anyone else who fails to perform their duties. But, the problem is, who is willing to bring a case against him. Why was the congress so motivated to impeach Clinton over a blowjob, but unwilling to do so to Bush who has clearly abdicated his constitutionally mandated duties to uphold the laws of the United States?

Oh, right, partisan politics. Or is it that they are scared of him. He has become too powerful for his opponents, whether they be congress or judicial, they are frightened. Interestingly enough, while it is clear the constitution would allow, nay, require the impeachment of this administration, there is one glitch. The constitution also mentions something else:

Article I, Section 2:
The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Partisanship would overrule should the House ever get over their fear and be able to live up to their constitutionally mandated authority to impeach the president and vice-president. Viva la republicanos.


It is never too late to begin the impeachment and removal from office of the president and vice president.