Content deleted Content added
Adding local short description: "Statement by US president when approving laws", overriding Wikidata description "written pronouncement issued by the President of the United States upon the signing of a bill into law" |
m Dating maintenance tags: {{Needs update}} |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 2:
{{Multiple issues|{{Update|date=June 2021}}
{{More citations needed|date=June 2021}}}}[[File:Bush reagan.jpg|thumb|right|Presidents [[Ronald Reagan]] (left) and [[George H. W. Bush]] (right) issued significant numbers of signing statements containing constitutional objections to laws passed by Congress.]]
A '''signing statement''' is a written pronouncement issued by the [[President of the United States]] upon the signing of a [[Bill (proposed law)|bill]] into [[law]]. They are usually printed in the ''[[Federal Register]]''{{'}}s ''[[Daily Compilation of Presidential Documents|Compilation of Presidential Documents]]'' and the ''[[United States Code Congressional and Administrative News]]'' (USCCAN). The statements offer the president's view of the law or laws created by the bill.
There are two kinds of signing statements. One type, which is not controversial, consists only of political rhetoric or commentary, such as praising what the bill does and thanking Congress for enacting it. The other type, which has attracted significant controversy, is more technical or legalistic, and consists of the president's interpretations of the meaning of provisions of the bill—including claims that one or more sections are unconstitutional. The latter type usually amount to a claim that newly created legal restrictions on the executive branch or president are not binding and need not be enforced or obeyed as written.
Line 42:
===Supreme Court rulings===
The [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] has not squarely addressed the limits of signing statements. ''[[Marbury v. Madison]]'' (1803) and its progeny are generally considered to have established [[judicial review]] as a power of the Court, rather than of the Executive. ''[[Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.]]'', 467 U.S. 837 (1984), established court deference to executive interpretations of a law{{needs update|date=September 2025}} "[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=467&page=837 if Congress has not directly spoken to the precise question at issue]" and if the interpretation is reasonable. This applies only to executive agencies; the President himself is not entitled to Chevron deference. To the extent that a signing statement would nullify part or all of a law, the Court may have addressed the matter in ''[[Clinton v. City of New York]]'' (1998), which invalidated the [[line-item veto]] because it violated [[bicameralism]] and [[Presentment Clause|presentment]].
===Presidential usage===
Line 194:
*[http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/03/24/bush_shuns_patriot_act_requirement Bush Shuns Patriot Act Requirement] By [[Charlie Savage (author)|Charlie Savage]]. [[The Boston Globe]]. March 24, 2006. (Disclosing Bush's claim, in a signing statement, that he has the authority to defy provisions in the new version of the [[USA Patriot Act]] requiring him to tell Congress how he is using its expanded police powers.)
*[http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6539 The Problem With Presidential Signing Statements] by [[Richard Allen Epstein|Richard A. Epstein]], [[Cato Institute]], July 18, 2006.
*[http://web.archive.org/web/20060505045749/http://www.boston.com:80/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/?page=full Bush Challenges Hundreds of Laws] By [[Charlie Savage (author)|Charlie Savage]]. [[The Boston Globe]]. April 30, 2006. (A detailed look at five years of specific signing statement claims.)
*[http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/10/06/bush_cites_authority_to_bypass_fema_law/?page=1 "Bush cites authority to bypass FEMA law"] by [[Charlie Savage (author)|Charlie Savage]]. ''The Boston Globe'', October 6, 2006
*[http://www.wcl.american.edu/hrbrief/14/1palmer.pdf?rd=1 Reinterpreting Torture: Presidential Signing Statements and the Circumvention of U.S. and International Law] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070703005624/http://www.wcl.american.edu/hrbrief/14/1palmer.pdf?rd=1 |date=2007-07-03 }} by Erin Louise Palmer. Human Rights Brief (Fall 2006).
Line 201:
{{DEFAULTSORT:Signing Statement}}
[[Category:George W. Bush administration controversies]]
[[Category:Presidency of the United States]]
[[Category:Government statements]]
[[Category:Article One of the United States Constitution]]
[[Category:Democratic backsliding in the United States]]
| |||