[4CJ]

My point has been proven.

Not quite.  You have yet to refute any decision of SCOTUS, and I cited quite a few.  You have cited exactly zero.

I asked you to specifically cite which part of the War Powers Resolution you found to be unconstitutional, I even provided a link to a great article discussing the WPR in detail, instead, you cited the resolution passed by Congress in the aftermath of the attacks on 9/11.

My bad.  Even though you specifically addressed the WPR the text I cited from your post #115 was the latter resolution.  I will correct my error below.

The War Powers Resolution was passed by Congress in the 1970's, while Nixon was president.

The War Powers Resolution (93-148) passed 7 Nov 1973, stated,

SEC. 2. (c) The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

Sections 2(c)(1) and 2(c)(3) follow the Constitution.  The power of Congress to delegate the ability to declare war, or any other legislative power, has already been refuted by the Supreme Court of the United States (see previous comments from those 19th century luminaries.  Secondly, the wording of the WPR cites "specific" statutory authorization, yet a blanket resolution against terrorists hardly meets that definition.

The Persian Gulf War was conducted under a 1991 congressional resolution, not the WPA of 1973.  As noted in the header to this article, "President Bush has argued that the resolution Congress passed after the Sept. 11 attacks also gives him broad authority to conduct operations in Iraq."

Again, please refer to the decision by founding father Justice John Jay in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, Federalist Paper #74 by Alexander Hamilton, the opinion held by Abraham Lincoln, the opinion Justice Davis in ex parte Milligan, and numerous other decisions by the Supreme Court.

Stick a fork in this one, he's done.

I hope you enjoy crow.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Crow?

Laughable.

There was an attack on the United States, and whether you agree with the wording of the resolution passed after 9/11, it pertains.

Then again, you could put your money where your mouth is and challenge the constitutionality of the WPR, or of the congressional resolution, or go to court claiming that the actions of either the president, or congress, are unconstitutional.

You won't, and you won't mostly because as much as you claim that these things are important to you, they aren't sufficiently important to do anything other than discuss the exact definition of the word "specific", and what you believe to be a "blanket resolution" on some internet bulletin board.

I don't bother refuting any SCOTUS decisions you have posted, because they do not apply...much as you would love to stretch them, they are irrelevant.

The reason why I have cited zero, is because the WPR has never had its constitutionality challenged in the nearly thirty years its been the law of the land.

The congress has given the president specific statuatory authorization to find all those involved in the attacks.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-

(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Crow?

Is that a feather sticking out of your mouth?