Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Wuli

> The “Constitutional requirement” is actually met when the Congress chooses not to act to vote to terminate hostilities by its demand. <

I don’t quite follow. A decision by Congress not to act cannot override the plain meaning in the Constitution. Presidents cannot start wars on their own. That is the exclusive domain of Congress.

Congress has looked the other way when a president starts a quick and limited war. Jefferson’s war against the Barbary pirates is an example of that.

But Congress has also looked the other way when a president starts what is sure to be a long and expensive war (expensive in money and blood).

LBJ’s Vietnam War is an example of that. W’s Iraq adventure is another. I can only hope Trump won’t be added to that list.


16 posted on 05/01/2026 2:00:56 PM PDT by Leaning Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: Leaning Right

“I don’t quite follow. A decision by Congress not to act cannot override the plain meaning in the Constitution. Presidents cannot start wars on their own. That is the exclusive domain of Congress.”

The Constitutional requirement is met, because the Congress inaction is, Constitutionally, its action. When Congress lets the 60 day limit pass, Congress has, de facto, given its consent, by default.


18 posted on 05/01/2026 2:05:57 PM PDT by Wuli (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson