The task force released unanimous recommendations to:
oppose, as contrary to the rule of law and our constitutional system of separation of
powers, a President's issuance of signing statements to claim the authority or state the
intention to disregard or decline to enforce all or part of a law he has signed, or to
interpret such a law in a manner inconsistent with the clear intent of Congress;
urge the President, if he believes that any provision of a bill pending before Congress
would be unconstitutional if enacted, to communicate such concerns to Congress prior to
urge the President to confine any signing statements to his views regarding the meaning,
purpose, and significance of bills, and to use his veto power if he believes that all or part
of a bill is unconstitutional;
urge Congress to enact legislation requiring the President promptly to submit to Congress
an official copy of all signing statements, and to report to Congress the reasons and legal
basis for any instance in which he claims the authority, or states the intention, to disregard
or decline to enforce all or part of a law he has signed, or to interpret such a law in a
manner inconsistent with the clear intent of Congress, and to make all such submissions be
available in a publicly accessible database.
urge Congress to enact legislation enabling the President, Congress, or other entities or
individuals, to seek judicial review of such signing statements to the extent constitutionally
permissible, and urge Congress and the President to support a judicial resolution of the
President's claim or interpretation.
"This memorandum provides you with an analysis of the legal significance of Presidential signing statements. It is addressed to the questions that have been raised about the usefulness or validity of a such statements. We believe that such statements may on appropriate occasions perform useful and legally significant functions. These functions nclude (1) explaining to the public, and particularly to constituencies interested in the bill, what the President believes to be the likely effects of its adoption, (2) directing subordinate officers within the Executive Branch how to interpret or administer the enactment, and (3) informing Congress and the public that the Executive believes that a particular provision would be unconstitutional in certain of its applications, or that it is unconstitutional on its face, and that the provision will not be given effect by the Executive Branch to the extent that such enforcement would create an unconstitutional condition.
These functions must be carefully distinguished from a much more controversial -- and apparently recent -- use of Presidential signing statements, i.e., to create legislative history to which the courts are expected to give some weight when construing the enactment."
17 U.S. Op. Off. Legal Counsel 131, 1993 WL 778044.
Please suggest a new category, a new item for this category, or improved categorization. Tell us about dead and changed links!
We hope you find our Public Edition to be useful.
But we want you to know that our best and most useful material is provided only by subscription./p>
Our Enhanced Subscriber Edition turns you into a far more efficient, more effective user of the vast legal and governmental resources scattered across the Web as well as those that comprise the heart of Minnesota-specific legal and governmental resources and law-practice related knowledge.
Call us or contact us through the site to learn how your firm or organization can put the full power of our Minnesota Law Practice WebSM at your service.
Powered by LawsaurusTM expert support system software from Pritchard Law Webs.