Quote:
Originally Posted by Barb
Well, a congresswoman on Fox, speaking before the president's remarks, said that should Congress vote NOT to attack Syria, the Commander in Chief could still do it.
It would be met with great opposition, but he could do it...at least that's what she said, and I can't recall her name.
|
Let me guess, she was a Democrat, right?
It's not true. The War Powers Resolution says that the President can order military strikes under only three conditions: a Congressional declaration of war, other Congressional authorization, or in retaliation for an attack on America.
That's it. Two of the conditions MUST have Congressional votes; the third requires it be in retaliation for an attack on the US.
Quote:
(c) Presidential executive power as Commander-in-Chief; limitation
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.
|
The bombing in Syria was NOT an attack against the US, and doesn't satisfy #3.
Remember, VP Biden was on tv when W was President, saying that his experience with Constitutional law says that the President MUST have Congressional approval; he went on to threat impeachment if W acted without winning a vote in Congress.