Synopses & Reviews
Americans tend to believe in government that is transparent and accountable. Those who govern us work for us, and therefore they must also answer to us. But how do we reconcile calls for greater accountability with the competing need for secrecy, especially in matters of national security? Those two imperatives are usually taken to be antithetical, but Heidi Kitrosser argues convincingly that this is not the caseand that our concern ought to lie not with secrecy, but with the sort of unchecked secrecy that can result from presidentialism,” or constitutional arguments for broad executive control of information.
In Reclaiming Accountability, Kitrosser traces presidentialism from its start as part of a decades-old legal movement through its appearance during the Bush and Obama administrations, demonstrating its effects on secrecy throughout. Taking readers through the key presidentialist argumentsincluding supremacy” and unitary executive theory”she explains how these arguments misread the Constitution in a way that is profoundly at odds with democratic principles. Kitrossers own reading offers a powerful corrective, showing how the Constitution provides myriad tools, including the power of Congress and the courts to enforce checks on presidential power, through which we could reclaim government accountability.
Review
“Reclaiming Accountability offers an extremely powerful and persuasive response to the dominant scholarly narratives today regarding executive power. This topic could hardly be timelier or more important.”
Review
“Secrecy breeds power, and power demands secrecy. Kitrosser shows how this dynamic has changed the American presidency and threatened our democracy. She provides a nuanced and compelling diagnosis of the problem secrecy creates and concrete proposals for how to get accountability back.”
Review
"In Reclaiming Accountability, Kitrosser examines how theories of presidential supremacy and of a unitary executive have undermined accountability by encouraging unchecked secrecy. Her analysis deftly applies constitutional history and theory to many contemporary assertions of presidential power. Every chapter rewards the reader by providing detailed information, nuanced arguments and telling insights. Kitrosser speaks to researchers, legislators, transparency advocates, and to anyone troubled by the risks to democratic governance posed by limited executive accountability. She gives us much to consider and much to do."
Review
"Over the years, Kitrosser has provided sound and insightful analysis about the damage done to government by executive branch secrecy and inflated presidential power. In Reclaiming Accountability, she directs her research to the steps needed to restore constitutional government, the system of checks and balances, and the Framers' faith in self-government that is rooted in voters sending their representatives to Congress. An important and thoughtful book."
Review
"Those of us concerned with the steady and apparently irresistible growth of presidential administration will find in Kitrosser's brilliant book a thoughtful response, thoroughly grounded in original understandings, to the overstatements of the constitutional arguments claimed to support it, and a careful exposition of counter-arguments that could help to curb it. Rich with detail and examples, she shows how the arguments for presidential accountability, well grounded in our Constitution, support neither presidential supremacy nor the stronger forms of argument for a unitary executive, but rather one in which executive secrecy and command are contained by law. The laws whose faithful execution the President is obliged to assure assign duties to others than himself, and unless he is the absolute monarch the authors of our Constitution clearly rejected, those assignments must be a part of the law whose faithful execution he is responsible for. Kitrosser's welcome analysis suggests how this might be accomplished."
Review
"One of the deeply satisfying features of Kitrosser’s book (which is a work of scholarship, not a polemic) is her scrupulous and nuanced presentation of the presidential supremacist perspective. Her purpose is not to ridicule its weakest arguments, but to engage its strongest ones . . . . [Kitrosser's] book adds analytical rigor and insight to current debates over secrecy and accountability, which it ultimately aims to inspire and inform."
Review
"Kitrosser recommends that we recommit ourselves to the basic constitutional framework for limiting presidential war powers. For Kitrosser, what is at stake in the ongoing contest to limit presidential power is information. Under the guise of protecting the nation’s security, presidents have seized—just as Congress and the courts have ceded—all manner of information about the communications, plans, and travel of citizens and noncitizens alike."
Review
“Essential. . . . This book should be considered a must read by anyone interested in presidential power, secrecy, and law. Kitrosser . . . provides a rich and thoughtful review of the conceptual origins of presidential power advocacy and the rationale for employing a substantive accountability framework. . . . Her conclusions on moving forward provide readers with interesting and thought-provoking ways to counter the aggressive and imperious forms of presidential supremacy in action.”
Synopsis
As seen on The Daily Show, July 24
State secrets, warrantless investigations and wiretaps, signing statements, executive privilege -- the executive branch wields many tools for secrecy. Since the middle of the twentieth century, presidents have used myriad tactics to expand and maintain a level of executive branch power unprecedented in this nation's history.
Most people believe that some degree of governmental secrecy is necessary. But how much is too much? At what point does withholding information from Congress, the courts, and citizens abuse the public trust? How does the nation reclaim rights that have been controlled by one branch of government?
With Presidential Secrecy and the Law, Robert M. Pallitto and William G. Weaver attempt to answer these questions by examining the history of executive branch efforts to consolidate power through information control. They find the nation's democracy damaged and its Constitution corrupted by staunch information suppression, a process accelerated when black sites, enemy combatants, and ghost detainees were added to the vernacular following the September 11, 2001, terror strikes.
Tracing the current constitutional dilemma from the days of the imperial presidency to the unitary executive embraced by the administration of George W. Bush, Pallitto and Weaver reveal an alarming erosion of the balance of power. Presidential Secrecy and the Law will be the standard in presidential powers studies for years to come.
Synopsis
As seen on The Daily Show, July 24
State secrets, warrantless investigations and wiretaps, signing statements, executive privilege--the executive branch wields many tools for secrecy. Since the middle of the twentieth century, presidents have used myriad tactics to expand and maintain a level of executive branch power unprecedented in this nation's history.
Most people believe that some degree of governmental secrecy is necessary. But how much is too much? At what point does withholding information from Congress, the courts, and citizens abuse the public trust? How does the nation reclaim rights that have been controlled by one branch of government?
With Presidential Secrecy and the Law, Robert M. Pallitto and William G. Weaver attempt to answer these questions by examining the history of executive branch efforts to consolidate power through information control. They find the nation's democracy damaged and its Constitution corrupted by staunch information suppression, a process accelerated when "black sites," "enemy combatants," and "ghost detainees" were added to the vernacular following the September 11, 2001, terror strikes.
Tracing the current constitutional dilemma from the days of the imperial presidency to the unitary executive embraced by the administration of George W. Bush, Pallitto and Weaver reveal an alarming erosion of the balance of power. Presidential Secrecy and the Law will be the standard in presidential powers studies for years to come.
Synopsis
As seen on The Daily Show, July 24
State secrets, warrantless investigations and wiretaps, signing statements, executive privilege--the executive branch wields many tools for secrecy. Since the middle of the twentieth century, presidents have used myriad tactics to expand and maintain a level of executive branch power unprecedented in this nation's history.
Most people believe that some degree of governmental secrecy is necessary. But how much is too much? At what point does withholding information from Congress, the courts, and citizens abuse the public trust? How does the nation reclaim rights that have been controlled by one branch of government?
With Presidential Secrecy and the Law, Robert M. Pallitto and William G. Weaver attempt to answer these questions by examining the history of executive branch efforts to consolidate power through information control. They find the nation's democracy damaged and its Constitution corrupted by staunch information suppression, a process accelerated when "black sites," "enemy combatants," and "ghost detainees" were added to the vernacular following the September 11, 2001, terror strikes.
Tracing the current constitutional dilemma from the days of the imperial presidency to the unitary executive embraced by the administration of George W. Bush, Pallitto and Weaver reveal an alarming erosion of the balance of power. Presidential Secrecy and the Law will be the standard in presidential powers studies for years to come.
Synopsis
Americans have long treated government accountability as a birthright. However, accountability is frequently tossed about in a rhetorically effective but substantively empty way. We often feel that those in government “work for us” and therefore must “answer to us,” but fail to grapple with the conditions under which we can really assess how accountable our government is. This is especially true with respect to matters of secrecy and transparency in government as, while we routinely voice support for transparency and accountability, we too often tolerate secrecy when associated with “national security.” The government plainly needs to keep some information secret, and there are ways to reconcile secrecy with accountability. In
Reclaiming Accountability, unchecked secrecy is the primary concern as insufficient checking breeds unnecessary, even counterproductive, secrecy and is also deeply antithetical to accountability.
Heidi Kitrosser shows how, for all of its influence, “presidentialism” badly misreads the Constitution. The book first explains presidentialism and its major component parts - “supremacy” and “unitary executive theory.” It then details how supremacy and unitary executive theory manifest themselves as arguments for a broad presidential power to control information. The descriptive elements lay the groundwork for Kitrosser's two normative arguments. The first is that the Constitution situates the presidency within a substantive accountability framework that entails substantial congressional and judicial leeway to impose and enforce external and internal checks on presidential power to foster transparency and accountability. And, closely related, the second argument is that supremacy and unitary executive theory misread the Constitution.
About the Author
Heidi Kitrosser is professor of law at the University of Minnesota.
Table of Contents
Chapter 1. The Constitutional Law of Government Secrecy
Chapter 2. The Tools and Politics of Constitutional Meaning
Chapter 3. Substantive Accountability and External Checking
Chapter 4. Supremacy Explained and Critiqued
Chapter 5. How Supremacy Undermines Substantive Accountability
Chapter 6. Presidential Supremacy in the Courts
Chapter 7. Substantive Accountability and Internal Checking
Chapter 8. How Unitary Executive Theory Undermines Substantive Accountability
Chapter 9. Where Do We Go from Here?
Notes