WASHINGTON — Atty. Gen. Edwin Meese III said arguments being raised over the Boland amendment in the Iran- contra affair may fall into a category of controversies that have to be resolved by the Supreme Court.
Meese referred to laws passed by Congress that restrict the power of the President in ways the President deems unconstitutional.
In an interview to be broadcast on public television today, Meese refused to comment on the Iran-contra affair and the assertion by the White House that the Boland amendment's restrictions on aid to the Nicaraguan rebels did not apply to President Reagan.
"A President is always beholden to and bound by the law," Meese said.
When asked how Reagan could then maintain that the Boland amendment did not cover him or his staff, Meese refused to comment on the specific case but spoke on the issue of restrictions on the President.
"If the Congress operated unconstitutionally, passed a law which was unconstitutional to bind the President and which would limit him in an unconstitutional manner from performing his duties under the Constitution, then that's the kind of thing that would not be binding on a President because it was not a valid law," Meese said.