Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T07:43:57.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - The Unitary Executive and the Commander-in-Chief Power

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Robert J. Spitzer
Affiliation:
State University of New York Cortland
Get access

Summary

During the summer of 2004, a series of internal Bush administration memoranda and reports became public detailing a variety of justifications for the administration's detention, handling, and interrogation of various suspects and combatants captured in the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq. Most of these documents were authored or supervised by administration lawyers including then–White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales; William J. Haynes II, General Counsel to the Department of Defense; David Addington, Counsel to Vice President Dick Cheney; Timothy E. Flanigan, Deputy White House Counsel; Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, head of the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel; and John Yoo, Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel.

The release of these documents prompted considerable criticism aimed at the George W. Bush administration, focusing chiefly on arguments offered in these documents to justify the use of torture by the government. These revelations stood in stark contrast to long-standing American policy rejecting the use of torture. The position articulated by President Bush in June 2003, for example, regarding the use of torture was this: “Freedom from torture is an inalienable human right…. The United States is committed to the worldwide elimination of torture and we are leading this fight by example.” Within a year, however, the administration was reeling not only from release of documents seeking to justify torture but also from revelations of the use of torture by American forces in Afghanistan, at the American-controlled Guantánamo Base on the island of Cuba, and most vividly at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, where videotapes and photographs of prisoners being subjected to a wide variety of “sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses” by American captors made worldwide news.

Type
Chapter
Information
Saving the Constitution from Lawyers
How Legal Training and Law Reviews Distort Constitutional Meaning
, pp. 90 - 128
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×