ByÂ CHARLIE SAVAGE, The New York Times
WASHINGTON â€”Â President Obama is facing criticism that crosses the political divide for not seeking Congressional authorization before ordering the American military to join in attacks of Libyan air defenses and government forces.
Some Democratic lawmakers â€” including RepresentativesÂ Jerrold Nadler of New York, Barbara Lee of California and Michael E. Capuano of Massachusetts â€” complained in a House Democratic CaucusÂ conference call as the bombing began that Mr. Obama had exceeded his constitutional authority by authorizing the attack without Congressional permission.
That sentiment was echoed by several Republican lawmakers â€” including SenatorsÂ Richard G. Lugar of Indiana andÂ Rand Paul of Kentucky and Representative Roscoe G. Bartlett of Maryland â€” as well as in editorials and columns published over the weekend and on Monday in conservative opinion outlets like theÂ Washington Times editorial page andÂ National Review.
On Monday, Mr. Obama sent CongressÂ a two-page letter saying that as commander in chief, he had constitutional authority to authorize the strikes, which were undertaken with French, British and other allies. He wrote that the strikes would be limited in scope and duration, and that preventing a humanitarian disaster inÂ Libya was in the best interest of American foreign policy and national security goals.
The White House also noted that Mr. Obama had met with Congressional leaders to consult about the Libya situation on Friday. On March 1, the Senate unanimously approved a resolution calling for theÂ United Nations Security Council to impose a no-fly zone over Libya. The Security Council approved such a measure Thursday night.
Critics say the merits of the operation and its legality under international law are matters separate from the domestic legal question of who â€” the president or Congress â€” has the authority to decide whether the United States will take part in combat.
â€œWhen there is no imminent threat to our country, he cannot launch strikes without authorization from the American people, through our elected representatives in Congress,â€Â wroteRepresentative Justin Amash, a freshman Republican of Michigan, on his Facebook page. â€œNoÂ United Nations resolution or Congressional act permits the president to circumvent the Constitution.â€
Most legal scholars agree that the nationâ€™s founders intended to separate the power to decide to initiate a war from the power to carry it out. But ever since the Korean War, presidents of both parties have ordered military action without Congressional authorization.
The divergence between presidential practice for the past 60 years and the text and history of the Constitution makes it hard to say whether such action is lawful, scholars say. â€œThereâ€™s no more dramatic example of the â€˜living Constitutionâ€™ than in this area,â€ saidÂ David Golove, a New York University law professor.
Still, as a presidential candidate who promoted his background as an instructor of constitutional law, Mr. Obama appeared to adopt a more limited view of executive power when he answered a question about whether a president could order the bombing of Iranian nuclear sites without a use-of-force authorization from Congress.
â€œThe 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,â€ Mr. ObamaÂ told The Boston Globe in December 2007.
The administrationâ€™s legal team appears to be distinguishing between a full war and a more limited military operation, on the theory that the Libyan intervention falls short of what would prompt any Congressional authority to control decisions about whether to initiate hostilities.Asked about Mr. Obamaâ€™s 2007 statement, Tom Donilon, Mr. Obamaâ€™s national security adviser, said Monday that the administration â€œwelcomes the support of Congress in whatever form that they want to express that support.â€ But, Mr. Donilon added, Mr. Obama could authorize the operation on his own.
â€œThis is a limited â€” in terms of scope, duration and task â€” operation, which does fall in the presidentâ€™s authorities,â€ he said.
In the Globe survey, Vice PresidentÂ Joseph R. Biden Jr., then a senator, argued that a president would have â€œno authorityâ€ under the Constitution to bomb Iranian nuclear sites without Congressional authorization because even limited strikes can unintentionally prompt all-out war.
The question of whether presidents may initiate war has been disputed since 1950, when PresidentÂ Harry S. Truman started the Korean War without going to Congress. Truman said it was enough that the United Nations Security Council, new at the time, had granted permission. That claim was disputed, but it became a precedent. Subsequent presidents added more such precedents.
To read more, visit:Â http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/22/world/africa/22powers.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!
We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.