Posted on 06/24/2011 2:29:09 PM PDT by dead
Garrett: Bill Limiting Military Action in Libya is Unconstitutional
WASHINGTON, June 24, 2011 - Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ), Chairman of the Constitution Caucus, today voted against H.R. 2278, which would limit the use of funds appropriated to the Department to Defense for the United States armed forces in support of NATO’s military efforts in Libya.
“While I in no way support President Obama’s unauthorized, unconstitutional war in Libya, I could not vote for Rep. Rooney’s bill limiting the use of funds,” said Garrett after the vote. “As Chairman of the Constitution Caucus, I have serious questions related to the constitutionality of the bill. In particular, I do not believe it is within Congress’s power to dictate to the president how to conduct a war. The Constitution is very clear in this regard – Congress has the power to declare war and the president, as commander-in-chief, has the power to carry it out.”
“Furthermore, by dictating to President Obama how he can use American military forces in support of the NATO effort in Libya, we would authorize him to continue the same mission he has been carrying out for the past three months without congressional approval,” added Garrett. “While I have supported past efforts to defund the military conflict in Libya, I could not vote in support of a bill that only defunds some of the military effort while endorsing others. Congress should and must debate the merits of our foray in to Libya and either authorize it completely or demand that the president terminate our military engagement.”
From the outset, Garrett has been a staunch opponent of the Obama administration’s handling of the situation in Libya. On May 24, Garrett introduced H. Con. Res. 53, declaring that President Obama has exceeded his authority under the War Powers Resolution as it pertains to the ongoing military engagement in Libya and calls on the president to either seek formal authorization from Congress to continue the mission in Libya or cease armed engagement until such authorization is provided. In addition, on May 25, the House adopted by voice vote an amendment sponsored by Garrett to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2012 to clarify that the NDAA does not in any way authorize military action in Libya.
So get a formal declaration of war, already. No work-arounds.
Not gonna happen in a Republican House. Clear and decisive votes make the leadership 'uncomfortable'. Only symbolic votes are allowed.
Congress could simply defund the military I guess
congress has not declared war
the power of the purse belongs to congress
until a court declares a law unconstitutional, its the law
Declaration of War? What’s that?
Wasn’t the last one the USA issued way back on 12/8/1941?
After that we just played it by ear.
bush had a declaration of war
” until a court declares a law unconstitutional, its the law “
So, are you saying that Congress has no obligation to consider the Constitution when it passes legislation?? Or the Prez - whoever he may be - has no business considering the constitutionality of a bill when he signs it into law??
Funny - I thought they all took oaths to ‘preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution’.....
No, that is not correct. WWII in 1941 was the last declaration of war by the U. S. Congress.
No, Bush had "congressional approval" for war, whatever the hell that is.
Congress has not declared war since WWII.
He raises no points, he is saying the president has absolute powers.
Declaration of War? What’s that?
Wasn’t the last one the USA issued way back on 12/8/1941?
That’s right. Roosevelt was the last president with enough leadership ability to get a formal declaration of war through Congress. Since then it’s been UN resolutions and work-arounds. Incidentally that was the last major war that we won.
“While I in no way support President Obama’s unauthorized, unconstitutional war in Libya, I could not vote for Rep. Rooney’s bill limiting the use of funds,”
///
Garrett sounds like a very good man.
not only conservative, but has integrity.
i wish my congressman was even half as good...
You are correct, boner and cantor need a retirement vote.
wrong - bush had a declaration
if you think congress does not pass laws that they know are unconstitutional, it ain’t true
the war powers act was passed - most experts think its unconstitutional - but until its challenged in court, its the law of the land
how is that different than a declaration?
We have only declared war 5 times. None of the “Indian Wars” were declared, the Civil War was not declared, the War against the Barbary pirates was not declared, Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Gulf War, Balkan War, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
The War of 1812, the Mexican War, the Spanish War, World War I, and World War II are the only times the U.S. Congress has declared war.
wrong - bush had a declaration
Maybe his declaration was about no child left behind but we did not get a formal declaration of war from Congress.
He has no constitutional point. Since Congress did not authorize war, they have no obligation to fund it.
If Obama orders the military to seize every gun in the USA, does Congress have an obligation to fund the seizure?
It is stupid.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.