ProPublica reports the White House is considering using signing statements to undo all of Congress’ hard work to prevent Gitmo closure:
Under consideration are claims that the provisions amount to “undue infringement” on the president’s authority to exercise prosecutorial discretion, or that they are viewed by the White House as an “unnecessary and unwarranted intrusion,” on that power.
Several advisers were pushing for a broader statement that would also take issue with provisions related to detainee transfers. Obama has twice issued signing statements claiming that legislative provisions interfered with his constitutional authority to conduct foreign relations and could do so again. But there is some concern that the White House is on less firm ground in that area. The bill, while making future transfers difficult, does not ban them outright.
The bill can’t ban them outright because Congress lacks the Constitutional authority to do so. While Congress has actively opposed the closure of Guantanamo on representational grounds — Senator Webb’s fearmongering over Uighur inmates comes to mind — it has mainly used the purse-strings to frustrate presidential purposes.
Legislators are responding to the fear and hysteria whipped up by people like Liz Cheney, whose father made sure there would be little or no actual evidence to convict anyone. This new war, the Bushies argued, was a whole new kind of war in which none of the normal rules of war applied. The one-percent doctrine placed people both above the rule of law and beneath its contempt.
Guantanamo was built by executive powers. It will be ironic and disappointing, but not surprising, if executive powers are the only way to close this awful chapter of our history. The White House watched its options dwindle in Congress for two years; the midterm results make Congress more of an impediment than ever.
