Warring under the Constitution

Washington Times ^ | Tuesday, August 20, 2002 | Bruce Fein

[JohnHuang2]

Detractors of President Bush's contemplated war against Iraq insist a congressional declaration of war is necessary for its constitutionality. Since time for congressional deliberation before military action is feasible, the excuse for unilateral authority where time is of the essence is unavailing.

[JohnHuang2]

Tuesday, August 20, 2002

Quote of the Day by irish_lad

[2nd_Amendment_Defender]

Checks and balances of men and women who have power and authority are good.

[gcruse]

To go at leisure to war without the backing of the public and a Congressional declaration is recipe for second-guessing, dissent, and political cheap shots.

[Who is John Galt?]

Constitutional practice and evolution have thus superannuated the congressional power to declare war. But the result seems untroublesome.

"Practice and evolution?" I do not believe the Constitution mentions either "practice" or "evolution" as a means of amending the supreme law of the land. If I recall correctly, the specific approval of three-quarters of the States is required. And I suspect "the result seems untroublesome" only to those who prefer a ruling elite to the rule of law...

[Redcloak]

The discussion of the history is interesting, however, it's a moot point. Congress declared war on September 14, 2001.