Bush Refuses to Disclose Subpoenaed Documents to Congress

Bush refused on Thursday, June 28, 2007 to give to Congress subpoenaed documents related to the justice department firings on this, the deadline for doing so. The subpoena was issued on the grounds that the documents would shed light into the much publicized Justice Department Firings, which have brought an unshakable dark cloud over the office of Bush-appointee Alberto Gonzalez.

The White House's reasoning for not cooperating with Congress is based on the idea that divulging the documents would undermine the need for confidentiality within the Executive branch, a confidentiality that the White House claims is needed for national security.

It is well-known on both sides of the aisle that the current administration is one of the most secretive in history, and so it should not come as a surprise that it would fight to not air any dirty laundry, especially at a time in which the approval rating for the Administration is at a staggering low due to a seemingly unending string of controversies.

Let us pause for a moment to critically evaluate Bush's reason for keeping his dirty laundry in his laundry basket. More specifically, let's determine whether the 'executive confidentiality' argument is a legitimate exculpation for outright refusal to be as forthcoming as possible in a crucial investigation. At one level of critique, the defense is one akin to the ethical position known as 'Rule Utilitarianism.' The idea is that Bush has elected to act in accordance to a rule that, if followed, produces the best utility, as opposed to pursuing what would probably produce the best overall (even if not for him, personally) consequence in a particular situation. This Rule Utilitarian appeal justifies his conduct only if it is clear that the utility of following the 'confidentiality' principle is, in fact, more critical to national security than is whatever utility would be achieved by those investigating the attorney-general firings learning the relevant facts.