The Lawfulness of the Interrogation Memos (defends Bush Justice Dept. memos)

University of St Thomas Law School ^ | 5-13-09 | Prof Michael Paulsen

[stan_sipple]

"(A)s a matter of constitutional law, the OLC (Office of Legal Counsel) memoranda’s most sweeping, categorical, and controversial conclusion – that at all events no statute or treaty may limit thePresident’s sole constitutional powers as military” Commander in Chief” to direct and conduct the use of U.S. force – is in my opinion unquestionably correct. The Office of Legal Counsel has long and consistently defended the view, both in Republican and in Democratic administrations,that the President’s constitutional powers under Article II of the constitution, as chief executive and as Commander in Chief of the nation’s military, afford the President substantial autonomy of action in the areas of the conduct of the nation’s foreign affairs and the conduct of war and military actions. These powers, as constitutional powers of the President, cannot constitutionally be subject to congressional regulation or control. An act of Congress, or a treaty of the United States, that infringes upon the constitutional powers of the President of the United States is, by definition, unconstitutional.

[harpu]

bttt