The Constitutionality of Military Action Against Libya

http://www.ohioverticals.com/blogs/akron_law_cafe/2011/03/the-constitutionality-of-military-action-against-libya/ ^

[TigerClaws]

Is it constitutional for President Obama to have ordered military action against Libya without specific Congressional approval?

Following the adoption of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973, the President decided to enforce a "no-fly zone" in Libya - along with allies conducting a bombing campaign targeting military targets of the Gadhafi regime. A number of political figures have expressed their opinions about the constitutionality of this decision. Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN), Representative Ron Paul (R-TX) and Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) all state that the military action is unconstitutional, while Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Representative Mike Rogers (R-MI), Chair of the House Intelligence Committee have voiced support for the constitutionality of the decision. Commentator Glenn Greenwald takes a strong position against its constitutionality. In my opinion, the President's action is probably not constitutional. Unlike Greewald, however, I think that the question is a close one that turns upon an interepretation of treaty provision of the War Powers Act.

[Jack Hammer]

Constitutionality???

Is this a joke?

Can there really be anyone in America who actually believes that either Obama or his minions give a rat’s oss about the constitution?

What a quaint notion...

[SpaceBar]

And now that Congress is obsolete, the nascent dictatorship moves from adolescence to young adulthood.

[TigerClaws]

Wasn’t Zero a Constitutional Law Professor???

I assume he read the document at some point...

[TigerClaws]

Oh, yeah. THe other point: If he’s acting illegally = grounds for impeachment.

At least that’s what Joe Biden says.

[TheBattman]

“The President does not have power under the Constitution
to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a
situation that does not involve stopping an actual
or imminent threat to the nation...”

Senator Barack H. Obama, December 20, 2007.

[ltc8k6]

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/03/028667.php

Biden thought such a thing was an impeachable offense in 2007...

[Hoodat]

Federalist No. 69

The President is to be commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the United States. In this respect his authority would be nominally the same with that of the king of Great Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first general and admiral of the Confederacy; while that of the British king extends to the declaring of war and to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies-all which, by the Constitution under consideration, would appertain to the legislature.

-Alexander Hamilton-

[TigerClaws]

Exactly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivVJHOs0i0A

Obama spoke out on the topic as well.

[TigerClaws]

Direct link to Obama’s quotation being used:

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/CandidateQA/ObamaQA/

Looks like his staff wrote the responses on his behalf.

[steveab]

“The President does not have power under the Constitution
to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a......”

Great material for a 2012 political ad to defeat Obama.

[TigerClaws]

2. In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites — a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)

The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.

As Commander-in-Chief, the President does have a duty to protect and defend the United States. In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.

[jonrick46]

I asked for a no fly zone. What do I do to get a stinking no fly zone . . . .

Get out the fly swatter myself?

[Jack Hammer]

a. Obama may have been a Professor of Constitutional Law - although, since no one’s seen his credentials, it’s a matter for some doubt - clearly, however, he never read the document in question;

b. No one with an ounce of sense believes anything Joe Biden says.

[Kickass Conservative]

Obama was not a Professor of anything, especially Constitutional Law. He was a guest Lecturer when he wasn't busy being an Agitator, oops I mean Community Organizer.

The Constitutional Professor garbage was created by some Liberal living in his parent's basement.

[TigersEye]

btrl

[DNME]

So exactly WHEN are these toothless lions we sent to Congress, i.e. the Tea Party firebrands and wild-eyed conservatives, going to DO SOMETHING about this?

Impeachment would certainly make a statement, even if there’s no freakin’ way the Senate would actually sanction the usurper. SO DO IT ALREADY!! Use the quotes from Obummer and Biden to support the move to impeach!!

I thought we sent a whole pack of howling wolves to Congress last November. Have all of them been corrupted by breathing the fetid air of Foggy Bottom?

Looks like we’ll need an entire new slate of fire-eaters for the next election. Or maybe we should elect only lady conservatives next time around, since the women seem to be the only ones showing evidence of having spines lately.