President Obama: Don't Strike Syria Without Congressional Approval

On Sunday, Republican Sen. Bob Corker and Rep. Eliot Engel - a Democrat who voted for the Iraq war - told Fox News that President Obama should strike Syria first and get Congressional approval afterwards.

That's not how the U.S. Constitution says it should go. That's not how the War Powers Resolution (which, despite the name "resolution," is binding U.S. law) says it should go. The Constitution and the War Powers Resolution say that absent an attack on the United States, Congress must approve military action before it takes place. 

There is a common misconception about the War Powers Resolution that it allows the President can do whatever he or she wants for 60 days. This confuses one provision of the War Powers Resolution with the whole. In section 2c, the War Powers Resolution affirms that:

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.

There's another common misconception that because Presidents have claimed that the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional, it can be ignored. First, the President doesn't get to declare things unconstitutional on his or her own say-so—the President is entitled to his or her opinion, but that's all it is, an opinion. Second, while the constitutionality of some provisions of the War Powers Resolution have been disputed, the constitutionality of section 2c has never been in serious dispute. If other parts of the War Powers Resolution were to fall to a constitutional challenge - which they haven't - section 2c would still be good law.

According to a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll, 60 percent of Americans surveyed said the U.S. should not intervene in Syria's sectarian civil war, while just 9 percent thought President Obama should intervene. Even if Assad's forces used chemical weapons to attack civilians - at this point, an allegation which has not been proved, and an allegation that has a track record of being made without being borne out - only 25 percent of Americans would support U.S. intervention, while 46 percent would oppose it.

On July 24, the House approved an amendment by voice vote that would prohibit funding of any military action that violates the War Powers Resolution.

If President Obama can get us into war in Syria without prior Congressional approval, it will set a terrible precedent: a future president could get us more easily into war in Iran without prior Congressional approval.

Tell President Obama and Congress: there must be no U.S. military action in Syria without Congressional debate and authorization.

Congress is out of session right now. But there is no emergency that requires immediate, unconstitutional, illegal action. If there were an emergency that required immediate action, Congress could be called back into session. If there's no emergency that requires immediate action, then action can wait until Congress reconvenes.

Syria's sectarian civil war has been going on for years. If President Obama wanted to intervene militarily, he's had ample opportunities to put the proposition to Congressional debate and vote.

It is perhaps not a coincidence that when President Obama intervened militarily in Libya - also without Congressional authorization - Congress was out of session.

There is no provision in the Constitution or the War Powers Resolution for a "recess war." If the precedent is set that the President can do whatever he or she wants so long as Congress is out of session, the war powers provisions of the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution will be substantially undermined. And the prospect of war with Iran will get much closer, because a key speed bump on the road to war will be removed.

If Congress doesn't count, then the American people don't count. It's no accident that the permanent war party wants the President to go around Congress when the majority of Americans are strongly opposed to a new war. If Congress and the American people can be evaded in this case, it's a body blow to the principle that U.S. foreign policy should be subordinate to democracy and the rule of law.

 

It should not go unnoted that a U.S. military strike on Syria under present circumstances would be a grave breach of the U.N. Charter, because Syria has not attacked the United States and the U.N. Security Council has not approved military action in Syria.

Of course, there is a widespread belief in Washington and the country at large that the U.N. Charter and international law generally don't apply to the United States: "that's not for us to follow, that's for the little people to follow."

But even if this is your view - that the U.N. Charter doesn't apply to the United States - note that it is generally accepted in Washington that the fact that the U.S. would be in breach of the U.N. Charter if it strikes Syria without being attacked and without Security Council authorization has significant implications for whether U.S. military action is legal under the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution.

In past cases where an Administration has deployed force without Congressional authorization, and which supporters of military action without Congressional authorization cite as precedents - Kosovo and Libya - the Administration cited international action as justification: NATO action in the former case, UN action in the latter case.

Now, in fact, there's nothing in the Constitution or U.S. law that says that the Administration can act without Congressional approval because there's a UN resolution or a NATO agreement. But because Administrations have argued in the past that a UN resolution or NATO action can help justify U.S. military action in the absence of Congressional authorization, it matters that there is no UN resolution and no NATO action - the Administration's legal case for unilateral action is even weaker than in the Kosovo case or the Libya case.

Unfortunately, the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution are not self-enforcing when it comes to protecting Congressional war powers, democracy, and the rule of law. The enforcement is political. The Constitution and the War Powers Resolution are enforced when Members of Congress insist that they be enforced, and Members of Congress insist that the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution be enforced when they hear from the public that they want the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution to be enforced.

That's why it's important for the public to speak up. Tell President Obama and Congress to comply with the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution: no military intervention in Syria without prior Congressional approval.

It should not go unnoted that a U.S. military strike on Syria under present circumstances would be a grave breach of the U.N. Charter, because Syria has not attacked the United States and the U.N. Security Council has not approved military action in Syria.

Of course, there is a widespread belief in Washington and the country at large that the U.N. Charter and international law generally don't apply to the United States: "that's not for us to follow, that's for the little people to follow."

But even if this is your view - that the U.N. Charter doesn't apply to the United States - note that it is generally accepted in Washington that the fact that the U.S. would be in breach of the U.N. Charter if it strikes Syria without being attacked and without Security Council authorization has significant implications for whether U.S. military action is legal under the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution.

In past cases where an Administration has deployed force without Congressional authorization, and which supporters of military action without Congressional authorization cite as precedents - Kosovo and Libya - the Administration cited international action as justification: NATO action in the former case, UN action in the latter case.

Now, in fact, there's nothing in the Constitution or U.S. law that says that the Administration can act without Congressional approval because there's a UN resolution or a NATO agreement. But because Administrations have argued in the past that a UN resolution or NATO action can help justify U.S. military action in the absence of Congressional authorization, it matters that there is no UN resolution and no NATO action - the Administration's legal case for unilateral action is even weaker than in the Kosovo case or the Libya case.

Unfortunately, the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution are not self-enforcing when it comes to protecting Congressional war powers, democracy, and the rule of law. The enforcement is political. The Constitution and the War Powers Resolution are enforced when Members of Congress insist that they be enforced, and Members of Congress insist that the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution be enforced when they hear from the public that they want the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution to be enforced.

That's why it's important for the public to speak up. Tell President Obama and Congress to comply with the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution: no military intervention in Syria without prior Congressional approval.

No military intervention in Syria...GET SERIOUS ABOUT USING DIPLOMACY AND STOP COLLUDING WITH SYRIAN OPPOSITION IN STONEWALLING THIS PROCESS !!!!

Mr Naiman, Sorry, can not sign the petition.
NO WAR... period....
The congress gets hoodwinked into aligning with the administration.
Can not trust the congress or the administration...

You mean the Congress that would fellate a donkey for Netanyahu after braying for him 29 times -- you want THAT Congress to vote on whether US should kill more innocent people after a false flag provocation?

Good luck with that.

Here's the petition I would sign:

US military personnel: YOU HAVE MORAL AGENCY!

ANY order to fire on or attack Syria would be illegal.

It is the responsibility of ALL MILITARY PERSONNEL to refuse to obey an order to carry out an illegal act.

CALL Upon the US military to RESIST orders to carry out an illegal act.

Do you have the courage of EDWARD SNOWDEN, you warriors and protectors of the US Constitution?

Think of the Syrian people if no one responds to this use of WMD then they know that no one will defend them. Someone has got to defend the helpless and if not us then aparently no one else will.

11% of North Americans approve of U.S. military intervention in Syria, about the same as the approval rating of the Congress. While pressuring Obama to seek Congressional approval may slow the war drums, it will not silence them, as the Congressional rubber stamping of the Bush wars clearly demonstrates. Naiman, please draft a petition the 89% majority can support, put succinctly: "We oppose U.S. military intervention in Syria."

coach factory online http://www.usa-factory.com/
coach handbags outlet http://www.coachxoutlet.com/
coach store outlet online http://www.coach-storesonline2013.net/
coachfactory.com/shop http://www.bagcoupon2013.com/
coach outlet http://www.usacowy.com/
coach factory store http://www.coachfactories.com/
michael kors outlet online http://www.michaellkorsusaonline.net/
michael kors outlet http://www.themmichaelkorsoutlet.net/
shop.coachfactory.com http://www.buynewbags2013.com/
michael kors purses outlet http://www.getmichaelkorsoutlet.net/
michael kors usa http://www.michaelkorsoutlet2you.com/
louis vuitton outlet http://www.llouisvuitton-factory.net/
louis vuitton outlet online http://www.l-vusashop.com/
michael kors usa online http://www.new-michaelkorspurses.com/
supra footwear http://www.suprashoes-vip.com/
coach outlet online http://coachsoutletonline.webs.com/
coach outlet online usa http://coachoutletxusa.tumblr.com/
nike air max http://www.airmaxshoesfactory.com/
coach factory outlet http://coachoutletsfactory.webs.com/
coach factory outlet online http://coachfactorys.tumblr.com/
coach purses outlet http://coachpursesoutlets.tumblr.com/
michael kors outlet usa http://michaelkorpurses.tumblr.com/
coach store online http://www.cofactoryonline.com/
michael kors factory outlet http://www.cmichaelkorsoutlet.com/
michael kors store online http://www.mksfactoryoutlet.com/
coach outlet usa http://www.zxcoachoutlet.com/
michael kors usa online http://mkoutletstate.webs.com/

From time to time rumors reached me that if I do not care I reject , in particular a rumor in my early days with my expensive
Idleness Michael Kors Outlet Handbags , extravagance and conceit . But she got used to the quick use of pen and ink , and taught me how I michael kors purses bring the faculty to express . I
this is not to command all those who come from these competitions with triumph. Early in life louboutin outlet , at the age of fifteen years ,
Spelling, I could write a letter . If I had one thing to say , I Louis Vuitton Outlet Store could say so, that it in words that readers should know what I meant - a performance
House within half an hour to go Louis Vuitton Handbags away without my dinner , and had never returned. prada Then there was a correspondence - if such be called
Officer , trying to mop up the ink , and a sight to behold on the Colonel , in his agony , struck right through the blotting paper in this senior
but I think that Michael Kors Outlet Store a man with better knowledge would not be so low an opinion of me as he has formed . Years have passed, and Louis Vuitton purses now I can write , and
ever since succeeded to his . This was the occupation of my life for six or seven years christian louboutin shoes before I went to the post , and was not
remember the figure of the woman walking in the great room , where I Louis Vuitton Outlet Online sat with six or seven other writers , with a large basket on her arm and a
Visits, I can not but paid the louis vuitton bags feeling that it was very bad for his time and effort.

Domaine nombre de techniques naturelles d'élargissement de pénis décliné, nombre d'hommes sont déroutés sur lequel ces méthodes sont le plus sûr et le mieux rapide pour atteindre la taille du pénis qu'ils désirent: Facile et efficiente. agrandir le pénis (celles lequel vous seraient squeeze afin de arrêter un pipi, entre autres ). l'agrandissement de pénis Avec le ménage d'autres pratiques d'augmentation de pénis et l'épaisseur en expansion un ensemble de déplacements, c'était assez correctement ton programme d'agrandissement de pénis entier.

Hello mates, its enormous post about cultureand fully defined, keep
it up all the time.

I love what you guys tend to be up too. This sort of clever work
and reporting! Keep up the excellent works guys
I've added you guys to my blogroll.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • No HTML tags allowed
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.