Forcing a Bush veto that shows him prolonging an unpopular war is a political masterstroke. My question is .. does Bush have to veto, or can he just issue a signing statement?
A signing statement in this case would almost certainly cause the constitutionality of signing statements to come under immense scrutiny - and I don't think they can hold up to that.
The second thought in my post, erased, was to ask about legal options if a signing statement was signed. I believe that the executive is abusing power and subverting the constitution by issuing signing statements, anyway. What could the congress do?
