A Nation of Laws?

President Bush has issued more than 800 "signing statements", effectively disregarding selected provisions of laws which he's signed. This amounts to a line item veto, picking an choosing what aspects of the law he intends to follow, which has been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Although other Presidents have adopted this practice, this is 200 more signing statements than all previous Presidents have issued combined.

Trade agreements like NAFTA, which are clearly treaties, have not been approved by two-thirds of the Senate as required by the Consitution. It is argued that these are not treaties, but "executive agreements". The Constitution give the Congress the power to regulate commerce, not the executive branch, so how was this done? Congress provided the President "fast-track authority" (which will expire next year).

The federal government is scarcely enforcing immigration laws. Per the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus, during the Clinton administration there were an average of 698 employers fined each year for hiring illegal workers. In 2004, there were only three.

There were about 18,000 work site arrests in 1998. In 2004, there were 159.

Border apprehensions have dropped more than 30 percent even though the number of Border Patrol agents have doubled in the last decade.

In December of 2005, the press revealed that the government had instituted a comprehensive and warrantless electronic surveillance program that ignored the careful safeguards set forth by Congress. This surveillance program, purportedly authorized by the President at least as early as 2001 and primarily undertaken by the NSA, intercepts and analyzes the communications of millions of ordinary Americans.

Are we still a nation of laws? It doesn't appear so. I'm sure all this was done for the higher good (by our President's personal definition?), but eroding the rule of law will eventually lead to corruption and ruin.