EXECUTIVE WATCH

The Obama administration decided to scrap the Bush administration’s plans for missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic.  Defense Secretary Robert Gates gave more information about the season in a press conference, implicitly rebuking those who claimed this was more about politics than defense.  The New York Times put together a selection of responses to the news.  John Noonan reinforces the point that the old system was about future capabilities, not about present threats.  Nathan Hodge is one of several who points out that announcing this decision on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland was not the most politically astute move.  And Thomas Joscelyn follows up on the “updated intelligence” reports that led to the decision.

Last week, we noted that the Obama administration was putting in new procedures at Bagram AFB allowing detainees to challenge their detention.  As more details have emerged, however, reaction to this development seems to have shifted.  Spencer Ackerman, Glenn Greenwald, and Alex Knapp all weigh in with some variation of “this replicates Guantanamo at Bagram.”  Ackerman has the best quote: David Remes from Appeal for Justice says that the administration is replicating the Combatant Status Review Tribunals with the new order.  Greenwald points out that these new guidelines were issued one day before the DoJ appealed a ruling (.pdf) that interpreted Boumediene to extend habeas corpus rights to Bagram detainees.

The Obama administration delivered to Congress a document that, it says, lays out metrics to determine victory in Afghanistan.  Foreign Policy managed to acquire and post the entire document.  Spencer Ackerman offers the Cliffs Notes version.  Early reaction seems almost entirely negative, because the “metrics” read more like mission statements than measurable goals.  The Economist has the most disgusted reaction, saying that the document is disappointing and confusing.  Dave Schuler is also unimpressed, calling it a “wishlist” instead of a strategy.  Fred Kagan defends, if not the metrics themselves, at least the thinking behind them.

The Obama administration proposed the creation of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA), engendering pushback from several interest groups.  The CFPA would regulate businesses that extend credit to consumers in a wide range of products, including credit cards and mortgages.  Joshua Wright and Todd Zywicki have an essay up that argues that the CFPA is a knee-jerk response to the financial crisis that fundamentally misunderstands what led to the breakdown in financial markets.  Their key argument is that the problem was not the consumers but rather the lenders.  Ilya Somin piles on, arguing that the agency will lead to less (or less effective) consumer protection.  Obama advisor Larry Summers has fired back, accusing business groups of using “scare tactics” like the infamous “death panels” used against health-care reform.  Meanwhile, Judge Jed Rakoff angrily disapproved of a settlement between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Bank of America that, he said, would allow both of those organizations to profit by BofA’s wrongdoing at shareholders’ expense.

Several provisions of the PATRIOT Act are up for renewal, and several Democratic senators are promising to fight for expanded protection of civil liberties.  Julian Sanchez, who wants reform of the PATRIOT Act, has the full text of proposed changes here (.pdf).

Seven former CIA directors sent a letter to President Obama urging him to end John Durham’s probe of CIA interrogations.  Michael Goldfarb has the text of the letter and some background information on the seven men.  DoJ spokesman Matt Miller responds here.

The Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss in another DOMA case.  Dale Carpenter reviews the key points of the brief, noting that the main thrust is that the traditional definition of marriage should be subjected to rational basis review.  The brief itself is here (.pdf).  Ezra at Popehat has further thoughts, noting that the DoJ is vigorously defending a piece of legislation that the administration claims to detest.

Sophia Lee highlights the potential of executive agencies to reinterpret the Constitution to aid progressive goals.

While Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission is still pending before the Supreme Court, the D.C. Circuit issued a strong ruling in Emily’s List v. FEC, striking down many of the FEC’s rules as being too restrictive of statutory and constitutional rights.

Charlie Savage reported on a signing statement issued last month that allows the State Department to ignore a law forbidding U.S. diplomats from attending conferences led by state sponsors of terrorism.

President Obama asked New York governor David Paterson to cease running for re-election next year.  Paterson says he still plans on running.  James Joyner points out that there is nothing legally wrong with this, but does feel that it’s another sign of presidents thinking that they have more power than they do.  Obama has also lobbied Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick to try to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy in time to assist passing the health-care bill.

Andrew Sullivan wrote an open letter to George W. Bush in which he called upon the former president to admit responsibility for torture and open a frank discussion on the subject.  While the letter has an obvious slant to it, I have to agree with Scott Horton that the letter is remarkably fair-minded.

Two men were arrested in Colorado and one in New York; the DoJ has accused the men of planning a terrorist attack.

U.S. commandos killed an al-Qaeda commander in Somalia.  Somali fighters struck back by blowing up two U.N. vehicles being used by African Union troops, killing 11.

The DoJ is investigating former Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton.  Norton, who served in the George W. Bush administration, awarded oil shale leases to a company that she later went to work for as a legal advisor.

The son of Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi wrote a dissertation for the London School of Economics in which he lamented that the current system of global governance is too undemocratic.  Bonus: The research for Saif al-Islam Gaddafi’s dissertation was done by a corporate consultant company that includes the former head of MI6.

Image credit: The Register.