Executive branch officials understandably seek to maximize their authority to regulate the distribution and disclosure of classified national security information, and they often cite historical precedents dating back to the days of President George Washington to justify their claims. But though some members of Congress seem not to realize it, Congress has an independent claim to access such information, a claim with its own historical foundation.
A new analysis (pdf) by Louis Fisher of the Law Library of Congress provides a nuanced account of several episodes from the Washington Administration that tend to refute the more expansive views of executive branch authority over classified information.
“Upon closer examination, precedents from the Washington Administration do not support the claim of exclusive and plenary authority by the President,” Dr. Fisher writes. “The scope of the President’s power over national defense and foreign affairs depends very much on what Congress does in asserting its own substantial authorities in those areas,” he concludes. See “Congressional Access to National Security Information: Precedents from the Washington Administration” by Louis Fisher, Law Library of Congress, May 22, 2009.
This is bigger than a singular elimination of race and ethnicity questions. It could accelerate the second wave of widespread reductions to demographic data, leaving public health officials with even less information to deliver better health outcomes for all Americans.
Soft law was never meant to be a permanent solution. Treating it as one, and letting the sandcastle stand in for the skyscraper indefinitely, is how we end up with a decade of voluntary commitments and no enforceable accountability to show for it.
FAS has partnered with ICLEI USA to launch the CRI Local Advisory Council.
We sat down with Dr. Max Moritz and Chief Rob Hazard to discuss how communities use time, money, and data to reduce the risk that wildfires pose.