First a purge, then a power play

THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION has a record of trying to expand the executive branch's power however possible. So although the Senate and House judiciary committees have demanded more information on last year's firings of nine US attorneys, the White House -- predictably -- is refusing to comply.

President Bush's assertion of executive privilege Monday is disturbing nonetheless. At the least, it means he will keep stonewalling inquiries into the firings. But there's more to the story. Executive privilege is often cited to protect information connected with presidential decision-making. By invoking it now, Bush is unwittingly implying the purge was instigated not by Justice Department middle managers, as department officials have testified, but by the White House itself.

The firings targeted nine US attorneys appointed by Bush. Several of them had pursued corruption allegations against Republicans or failed to pursue voter-fraud cases that might have damaged Democrats. The two committees are seeking administration documents on the firings and testimony from two former White House officials. By withholding the documents and urging the aides not to talk -- though at least one is expected to testify anyway -- the administration has provoked a showdown over whether Congress has the right to meaningful oversight of the executive branch. The committees should not shy away from this battle.

No one disputes the president's authority to name US attorneys. But these political appointees historically have been expected to oversee federal prosecutions in an impartial manner -- and to base decisions about whom to charge solely on the facts and the law.

The question is whether the administration abused its authority by pressuring the prosecutors to carry out Republican vendettas. The information demanded by the judiciary committees would shed light on that issue. It could also clarify whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told the House Judiciary Committee the truth in May when he claimed to have played a minimal role in the firings.

In the past, when the Congress wanted more information than the White House wanted to provide, the conflict usually ended in some kind of deal. Bush has offered to produce more information and witnesses, but with unacceptable strings attached.

Bush may be taking a calculated risk. The clock is ticking away on his administration. The Supreme Court has two new justices with an expansive view of presidential power. The president's approval rating is so low that resisting the committees' demands can hardly drag them down further.

The legal limits of executive privilege are largely unsettled. What's clear, though, is that the privilege is not absolute. It certainly does not give the president carte blanche to resist a legitimate inquiry into potential abuses.