The Washington Post today takes the President to task for his use of "signing statements," the Presidential papers in which he states what he believes the legislation does and does not do. The Post does not like what this President says and does with such statements. Amazingly, the editorial of a liberal paper is far more fair minded, clear-eyed and legally sound than the ABA's own pronouncements on the matter. The ABA practically attacked the very existence of such signing statements, while the Post takes issue with particular readings of the law by the President.

To my knowledge the ABA has never attacked signing statements during a Democratic Presidency. One of the key parts of the Republican platform is returning the major contours of our laws to the elected branches. The ABA more and more sees any deviation from Judges deciding all major societal questions as illegitimate, and any branch beside the Third defending its own powers and prerogatives as an attack on "judicial independence."

The letter to the ABA on judicial qualifications you can sign on to at the top of this page becomes more consequential every day. Next week the ABA meets in Hawaii. Here's hoping they say "Aloha" to the direction they are going which is to become just another Democratic lobbying group.