President Obama does have the duty to follow the law. He must faithfully execute the laws of the United States. Those laws include Congressional Acts, they include treaties, and they include the Constitution. So, while President Obama must follow the laws passed by Congress, he has an independent duty to follow the United States Constitution (the President swears in the Oath of Office to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.")

So, the President has independent authority under the Constitution and has a specific duty to administer laws consistent with the Constitution. Congress does not have executive authority and cannot give itself the right to approve how the executive spends funds or administers the law. This is different from oversight. Congress does have oversight authority over everything the executive does. Oversight means Congress can hold hearings, it can subpoena executive officials, etc. A better way to think of oversight is that Congress has the right to know how the Executive Branch is administering the laws.

Perhaps the best question is to ask, "is the signing statement consistent with the Constitution?" In Obama's case, he is saying the President can ignore a portion of a law that gives Congress executive authority. In Bush's case, he was saying the President has unlimited authority as Commander-in-Chief and that authority gives him the right to bypass laws as he chooses. Obama's carve out is much more limited than what Bush was doing.

Why can't we file a complaint? Lawyers are prohibited under every state's ethics rules from making materially false statements of law. Lawyers may also be disbarred for engaging in acts of dishonesty, and more importantly, for engaging in acts that are prejudicial to the administration of justice. In Bybee's case, his materially false statements of law resulted in the torture of human beings in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions. We need to flood every state bar under which he is admitted with ethics complaints.

This man is a monster and needs to be disbarred.

Great legal critique of the article. Such a devastating response on how torture does not violate U.S. and International law. Gosh these darn reporters seem to think that we are prohibited from torturing enemy combatants by the Geneva Conventions. Where do they get off?

Look, we all want this man impeached and in prison. However, we as citizens have limited power to take action on that. What we can do is try to embarrass him by getting him disbarred by those states in which he is admitted. Is he admitted in Nevada and D.C.? Is that it? While he has a nice cushy judicial position, we should do everything we can to prevent him from practicing law. Filing multiple bar complaints is the way to go. And if he gets disbarred, it will be easier to get him impeached. After all, how easy would it be to defend a torture apologist who does not qualify to practice law in any of our States?

I grew up in Iowa, which remains a good-government state. A state with great schools, good people, and a centrist population. I supported Republicans like Jim Leach and Terry Brandstad, and there are things I like about Sen. Grassley (his support for government whistleblowers and his criticism of the FDA). However, I have switched to the Democratic party since 2002, and I will not be returning.

Glenallen Walken doesn't provide a solution. Here's what the Republicans need to do: be the party of good government and pragmatism. Be the party of Eisenhower. Be the party of Teddy Roosevelt. Stop distracting voters with social issues. Concentrate on making government efficient, but realize that we need government. Realize that paying private contractors to do government work is not "small" government. Realize that antitrust and regulation are good things. Realize that we cannot sustain an economy solely through financial institutions. We need capitalism. We need to build things again. I like many of the things Democrats are doing right now, but I think it is a huge problem that they are themselves coddling these corrupt and bloated financial institutions. I hate it that Charlie Rangel has a senior leadership role in the party. They won't back off their unconditional support for Israel. There is a role for a pragmatic center-right party.

Why is there no voice in government saying, look let's put these banks in receivership? That's what Ronald Reagan would have done.

Exercise (including strength training) and healthy diet are the only ways to be healthy and keep weight down. I've never seen anyone have permanent success from diet alone, and it's depressing. If your physician thinks you are healthy, that's fine. However, obese isn't healthy, and I've never met a single obese person who avoids corn syrup in all forms and eats healthy. This is based on anecdotal evidence, but I would wager that no obese person walks on average a mile a day, has red meat less than three times a week, and chooses whole grains over white bread.

Please get rid of this gutless conservative who repeats generic right-wing dialogue, but doesn't have enough guts to give us his name.

Look let's have a dialogue with conservatives, but with real conservatives who have a brain like David Horowitz. What's the point in granting this man anonymity? He has never said anything contradicting right-wing common wisdom. This is a failure of journalism, and a disgusting addition to a once great site.