The Monarchy Of These United States

Jonathan Schwarz, posting at Tom Tomorrow's blog, takes a look at "The Powers of War and Peace", the new book by John Yoo. If you haven't heard of Yoo, consider yourself lucky. Yoo is one of the architects of the unitary executive theory of presidential power that the Bush administration has made their own. Until 2003, he worked in Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (current Attorney General Gonzales continues his legacy over there). Yoo contributed to the Patriot Act and authored many of the legal opinions of help to the administration, most notably arguing for the President's legal right to authorize (and get away with) all kinds of torture (ie. the hypothetical crushing the testicles of a child) forbidden under the Geneva Convention and international law. He is also believed to have provided the legal reasoning behind the President's warrantless wiretapping program(s). In general, he believes that the President has unlimited power- which cannot be hampered by statute- particularly in wartime.

Schwarz summarizes a Nation review of the book-

...You may remember from 10th grade the argument in 1787 between the federalists and anti-federalists over the ratification of the Constitution. The anti-federalists’ main worry was the Constitution as written would centralize too much power in the national government, particularly the executive branch. In fact, they said, we’d end up with a tyranny again, just after we’d fought a revolution to escape a king. Meanwhile, the federalists argued the Constitution had checks and balances that would prevent this.

Of course, the Constitution was ratified, leading to much rejoicing and eventually several segments of Schoolhouse Rock. But in history class they always tell you the anti-federalists were wrong: we didn’t end up with a tyranny. The Constitution prevents the executive branch from doing anything it wants. For instance, only Congress has the power to declare war.

But John Yoo has some surprising news: the anti-federalists were right! The Constitution does give the president, particularly in matters of war and peace, exactly the same powers of the British king circa 1787! The only difference is, Yoo thinks this is a good thing...

And the review itself summarizes the dangers of this theory, which is currently running the country-

...By dismantling checks and balances, along the lines idealized and celebrated by Yoo, the Administration has certainly gained flexibility in the "war in terror." It has gained the flexibility, in particular, to shoot first and aim afterward. It has acted on disinformation and crackpot theories and utopian expectations that could perhaps have been corrected or moderated if traditional decision-making protocols had been respected and key policy-makers had not silenced dissident voices and sequestered themselves in an echo chamber. Yoo sees no danger in allowing a poorly educated and sketchily briefed President, perhaps surrounded by yes men and fed picked-over intelligence, to define unilaterally the principal threats facing the country. He does not worry about irreversible decisions taken impetuously and without eliciting a second opinion. But if the misbegotten Iraq War proves anything, it is the foolhardiness of allowing an autistic clique that reads its own newspapers and watches its own TV shows to decide, without outsider input, where to expend American blood and treasure--that is, to decide which looming threats to stress and which to downplay or ignore...

Foolhardiness? Screw that- we're at war! All hail his majesty, King George!

[PS- Do the terrorists still hate us for our freedoms?]