George W. Bush and John McCain are more or less on the same page with respect to their policy platforms, but there are five areas where they disagree on crucial civil liberties issues in a way that could be relevant during a McCain presidency.
1. Torture
While both George W. Bush and John McCain believe that the president has the power to interpret torture law in whatever manner he chooses, McCain has stated on numerous occasions that he would not condone torture if elected president--and that waterboarding and other "torture lite" techniques do, in fact, constitute torture.Does this mean that we would see no torture under a McCain administration? No. We would continue to see unsanctioned torture, we would continue to see police torture, we would probably continue to see extraordinary rendition used to outsource torture to other nations, and we might even see use of a few torture lite techniques. But on the whole, we'd probably see less torture from McCain than we've seen from Bush.
2. Immigration Reform
A year ago, George W. Bush and John McCain both agreed that immigration reform granting a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants was the right approach. But the Republican primaries introduced immigration as John McCain's #1 liability, and he has since revised his position to say that until the border is secured, he will not entertain immigration reform proposals. The border between the United States and Mexico is 2,000 miles wide and cannot be secured, so this would amount to an indefinite moratorium. Don't expect McCain to sign any major immigration reform proposal, at least not during his first term.3. Same-Sex Marriage
George W. Bush supports the Federal Marriage Amendment, a proposed federal constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage in every state, while John McCain opposes it (not because he supports same-sex marriage, but because he opposes unnecessary federal intervention).In theory the president's position on constitutional amendments is not significant, since what is required is a two-thirds congressional majority and ratification by three-quarters of the states, but in practice it is unlikely that the amendment would resurface under a Republican president who opposes it. Even if Republicans take Congress back in 2010, don't expect the Federal Marriage Amendment to become an issue. (It stands no serious chance of passing anyway.)

