Skip to main content

View Diary: Bush claims Senate's pro forma sessions don't count (374 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think there's too much overanalysis (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    and paranoia.

    Bush wants to pocket veto the resolution, because then Congress cannot vote to override.  He issues a statement saying he is using the pocket veto, hoping everyone accepts that.  

    However, he knows the Senate is technically in session, and a pocket veto may not stand.  (It does not matter in which house the bill originated; the constitution requires "the Congress" to be adjourned).  

    If a pocket veto is the only mechanism he relies on, the bill may be declared law by a court.

    So he complies with the constitutional requirements for a veto, and returns the bill to the House with objections.  While he says he is doing this in order to prevent frivilous lawsuits about the validity of the bill, returning the bill with objections undercuts his argument that he has pocket-vetoed it.  Bills that are pocket-vetoed are not returned; they are stuffed in a pocket.

    It is immaterial that he did not say, "I am vetoing this bill."  The word "veto" is not found in the constitution.  He complied with the constitutional provision by returning the bill to the house in which it originated, with his objections.  He has vetoed the bill, regardless of what he pretends.  The veto can, and should be overriden.

    This has nothing to do with recess appointments.

    Fight the Democratic Culture of Capitulation!

    by Endangered Alaskan Dem on Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 07:51:04 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site