This Bush statement strikes me as an important news. It seems to be a White House effort to usurp the role of Congress in establishing the intent of the legislation that has been passed and signed into law.
It remains a question as to how the judiciary will interpret intent in the future -- will it defer to Congress as it has traditionally, or if presidents begin issuing their own statements, will judges defer to presidential intent instead? Will there be a battle among judges in deciding which branch of government is primarily responsible for how a law is interpreted.
It seems clear to me that the Bush administration, and judges like Alito, would like to see the executive have more power in influencing judicial interpretation. The Bush statement about the torture amendment is perhaps the first shot fired in what could be a long war over who gets to say what our laws mean.
In principle, then congress can be held accountable.
those statements of intent are actually quite functional from a standpoint judging democratic representation and accountability.
This statement is useless from any point of view except political -- it asserts the Executive's primacy over the other two branches -- an atextual, unAmerican doctrine.
Also, last time I checked, the Executive doesn't interpret the law. The Judicial Branch interprets the law. Bush doesn't get to decide which laws cover him and which don't.
