War Powers Act Does Not Apply to Libya, Obama Argues (Obama claims he's above the law)

NY Times ^ | 6/15/2011 | Charles Savage

[tobyhill]

The White House is telling Congress that President Obama has the legal authority to continue American participation in the NATO-led air war in Libya, even though lawmakers have not authorized it.

In a broader package of materials the Obama administration is sending to Congress on Wednesday defending its Libya policy, the White House, for the first time, offers lawmakers and the public an argument for why Mr. Obama has not been violating the War Powers Resolution since May 20.

On that day, the Vietnam-era law’s 60-day deadline for terminating unauthorized hostilities appeared to pass. But the White House argued that the activities of United States military forces in Libya do not amount to full-blown “hostilities” at the level necessary to involve the section of the War Powers Resolution that imposes the deadline.

“We are acting lawfully,” said Harold Koh, the State Department legal adviser, who expanded on the administration’s reasoning in a joint interview with White House Counsel Robert Bauer.

[rollo tomasi]

Founders give a detailed paper trail on why and how Congress should be the only Body to decide military action.

Executive Branches think they are above Congress concerning Article One Section Eight as well as think they only have the power to control "conflict".

Conflicts become all out war while Congress and the executive Branch play political games

War Powers Act tries to stop this corrupt nature of putting Americans in harms way and draining resources.

In the end, we would not need all these laws if Madison and Jefferson along with many more individuals who played a part in the United States Charter, were actually listened to and not ignored by Central Planners.

In the end we are all

[sam_paine]

The end positive of all of this may at the very least be that we are laying the groundwork for future Republican President(s) to be able to repeat the words of the Obammessiah to future Kucinich’s as to why WPR does not constrain America from defending herself in future (yes Wilma, there will be more) war.

[wiggen]

Why not Kuwait? Syria? Yemen? Why Libya?

[afnamvet]

Until then he's bound by his oath to faithfully execute the law.

Do you really think Obama cares a wit regarding law?

[wiggen]

Nobody seems to have standing in this nation any longer. Pay your taxes and shut up is the governments motto now.

[brent13a]

"Process is not where the rubber hits the road."

Accepting that is admitting partial defeat. Everything about our government is "process". What rubbish to simply ignore it because they chose to ignore it when it suits them and them alone.

"Save your outrage for something that matters."

I apply my outrage wherever it is necessary as a citizen. Right now, in the last 2 years, no matter where my outrage has been applied it's been met with blank RINO stares and continued incompetence from both sides of the aisle.

So if I want to apply it to this, I will. Because it should be.

[Ted Grant]

Yes, I agree, but they can meet the requirement by passing a budget.

[Ted Grant]

Yes, I agree. Take this to court and let the USSC strike down the War Powers act.

[Hoodat]

This isn’t about the War Powers Act. It’s about the Constitution of the United States of America. The President cannot wage war without Congressional approval. Hamilton was quite clear on that in the Federalist papers. That is what separated us from all other 18th century governments at the time in that the legislature and not the executive could commence a war.

[brent13a]

"The Executive has no right in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war; that the right of convening and informing Congress, whenever such a question seems to call for a decision, is all the right which the Constitution has deemed requisite or proper."-- James Madison, some dude who obviously does not understand the Constitution, but think he does.

"The whole powers of war being, by the constitution of the United States, vested in Congress, the acts of that body can alone be restored to as our guides in this inquiry." Talbot vs. Seeman 1801

What NATO Country did Lybia's army invade by the way?

Thomas Jefferson, another figure who did not understand the Constitution weighed in on Executive Power's ability to make war by stating:

“As the executive cannot decide the question of war on the affirmative side, neither ought it to do so on the negative side, by preventing the competent body from deliberating on the question.”

Remember Jefferson's mindset concerning his Presidency and Tripoli? Every decision to cross the line and engage offensive maneuvers came from Congress. Why? Because Jefferson understood that ONLY Congress authorized the use of force when attacking a foreign entity.

Obviously these individuals are simply a group of nobodies that should be relegated to the dustbins of unknown history. How dare you bring up quotes of such nincompoops! Their opinions mean nothing unless it furthers a progressive socialist cause only. Don't you know the rules?

[bvw]

It is indeed that simple. But he’s claiming an exemption because Facebook and Facebook’s founder says it’s a really cool thing to do.

[PghBaldy]

If this was so legal, why have LAWYERS announcing this, 90 days after it started? Why not Obama, on the first day?

[MinuteGal]

Last night when I turned on Brett Baier
I saw a war that wasn't there
It wasn't there again today
(That's what I heard Obama say)

Tonight when I turned on TV
The war was waiting there for me
Obama took the screen to call
There really is no war at all

So he can't see what we all see
His lies are quite far-fetched
His head is just a little tetched......
It's time for him to be impetched !

Leni

[allmendream]

Only if the budget specifically authorizes funding for specific military adventures could it be deemed a Congressional declaration of war.

That is quite a stretch that unless they remove funding they authorize war. Or that by allowing funds to be used they have de facto declared war.

That which is not forbidden is mandatory?

[andy58-in-nh]

...what exactly is “defensive” about the Libyan excursion? Answer: NOTHING.

My point, exactly.

[andy58-in-nh]

Essentially, what Congress wants is the pretense of power, but with sufficient insulation from responsibility to be able to convincingly blame failure - or disaster - on someone else, without ever having to explain themselves. Profiles in courage they are not.

[kidd]

I had to search through 116 posts before I found a Freeper who knows that

Obama invoked the War Powers Resolution as the reason to start action in Libya!!!

There are at lease two other times in your link where Obama invoke the WPR.

Freepers: see Hoodat's link.

[Brown Deer]

[RWB Patriot]

He’s broken so many, what’s one more?

[Ted Grant]

I don’t think that much specificity is required. I may be wring. Do you have USSC precedent?