Replies

To: exodus
Article II/Section 2 of the Constitution -
The President shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States

The air force isn't mentioned here. Do you think that the Air Force shouldn't recognize the president as the commander in chief? After all, the constitution clearly states that he's the CIC of the Army and Navy.
# 270 by Isle of sanity in CA

*************************

You're being facetious.
I'll play.

The Air Force didn't start out as the "Air Force." It was a part of the Army. Later, when air combat became more important and more specialised, it branched off from the Army and was RENAMED "The Air Force."

The Marines have always been a part of the Navy. (Don't tell them, though)

There has been talk for decades about breaking them off from the Navy and creating a new branch of military called "The Marines." (Original, huh?)

If they do create a new branch called "Marines," it will still be under the overall command of the Commander in Chief.

"The Air Force didn't start out as the "Air Force." It was a part of the Army. Later, when air combat became more important and more specialised, it branched off from the Army and was RENAMED "The Air Force.""

And, what was the Constitutional Authority for "branched(ing) off" the Air Force? I've checked the Constitution and I can find no authority granting Congress this power. Was this an unconstitutional ursurpation of authority? Shouldn't Congress have passed a Constitutional Amendment to accomplish this? How does Congress's actions here differ from the War Powers Act?

While we're at it, where is the Constitutional Authority for the United States to even have airplanes? Clearly, the Founding Fathers did not envision such a development. How about the Federal Aviation Agency? Is it Constitutional? Where in a "clear reading" of the Constitution are these things authorized?