The order to report to Kentucky was included in the Temporary Change of Station to Afghanistan.
Iran comes in because combat operations in both Afghanistan and Iran would be authorized by SJ Res 23, with the only stipulation by Congress being that “the President” be the person who decides on using force in those places.
So whatever procedure has to happen for lawful combat orders to Iran also has to happen for lawful combat orders to Afghanistan. If Lakin should refuse combat orders to Iran based on the fact that a valid POTUS didn’t make such an order, then Lakin would also have to refuse combat orders to Afghanistan based on the fact that a valid POTUS didn’t make such an order.
Judge Lind said that the POTUS is irrelevant to the lawfulness of Lakin’s combat deployment orders. If that’s true, then the POTUS would also be irrelevant to combat orders in Iran.
I’m asking if that’s really where we want to go with this. Do we really want brigade commanders making lawful combat deployment orders to foreign countries totally independent of the POTUS?
“Do we really want brigade commanders making lawful combat deployment orders to foreign countries totally independent of the POTUS?”
__
LOL! You’ve made this silly leap several times even though it is completely unsupported by anything that Judge Lind said. What she said was that the legality of an order from a superior to an inferior can be determined without reference to a determination of whether the President is eligible.
That bears no logical connection to your repeated hypothetical about brigade commanders initiating invasions.
As far as I'm aware nobody has been ordered to Iran, moot point.
Next you'll be arguing about legal orders to explore Uranus.
In what way are orders to report to Kentucky less valid than those to fall out for lunch?