Congress, Constitutional Law, International, Justice, Lawyering, Media, Military, Politics, Society, Supreme Court

Members of Congress Challenge Libyan War in Federal Court

Today, I have the honor of representing ten members of the United States House of Representatives in challenging the constitutional basis for the Libyan War — and the underlying claims made by President Obama. These members include Democrats and Republicans from across the political spectrum. They share a belief that Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution expressly requires the authorization of Congress before a president can commit the nation to war. The lawsuit will be heard in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. We filed this afternoon and held a press conference with the members in front of the courthouse. A copy of the complaint (which will be heard by Judge Reggie Walton) is below.


This challenge goes beyond Libya and challenges the claim by the Administration that the President has the inherent authority to order combat operations without the approval or declaration of Congress. The Plaintiffs in this action include the second most longest standing member of Congress, John Conyers, as well as leading members from both parties. The members are Representatives Roscoe Bartlett (R., Md); Dan Burton (R., Ind.); Mike Capuano (D., Mass.); Howard Coble (R., N.C.); John Conyers (D., Mich.); John J. Duncan (R., Tenn.); Tim Johnson (R., Ill.); Walter Jones (R., N.C.); Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio); and Ron Paul (R., Tx).

This is an action for injunctive and declaratory relief. In addition to challenging the circumvention of express constitutional language, it will also challenge arguments that no one (including members of Congress) has “standing” to submit this question to judicial review. These members will ask the federal district court for review of the constitutional question and for recognition that the Constitution must allow for judicial review of claims of undeclared wars under Article I.

I am being assisted in this case by a team including Jodie Cheng, David Fox, Kyle Noonan, Eric Sidler, and Geoff Turley (no relation to Professor Turley).

We are deeply honored to represent these courageous members of Congress in their defense of important constitutional limitations on executive power. While there are many uncertain questions under the Constitution, this is not one of them. The Framers spoke repeatedly and forcibly of their desire to bar presidents from committing the nation to war without congressional authorization and inserted an express limitation into Article I. The last few years have vividly demonstrated the dangers that the Framers sought to avoid in dividing the war powers between the Executive and Legislative branches. Despite their sharp ideological differences, these members are bond by deep faith in the Constitution and a sense of responsibility in defending its provisions. We shall their concerns and are eager to advance their claims in the Judicial Branch in this lawsuit.

As in past high-profile cases, I will have to be circumspect in my public comments once the case is filed.

Here is the filed complaint: Libyan Complaint;pdf

Jonathan Turley

155 thoughts on “Members of Congress Challenge Libyan War in Federal Court”

  3. All I have to say is Ron Paul, America, vote for this man.

    Nuff said..

    David S

  4. I just want you to know I was really pleasantly overwhelmed w/the birthday wishes…thank you all!

  5. I thought I commented on this yesterday, but I guess not. Just wanted to say thank you JT, this is good news. The concept of Pax Americana is a bad one and curiously our choices of intervention usually concern areas with oil. I wonder why?

  7. Woosty (and to a lesser extent OS),

    [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGtq7ytJ1sE&w=640&h=390]

  8. Swarthmore mom, who here, in particular, “apparently” thinks the Tea Party is a “positive force in the political landscape?”

  9. Sure, some in the tea party want to quit spending on wars which is fine. But this is just part of their agenda to cut or eliminate every government program in existence. Someone asked Ron Paul if wanted to privatize the Grand Canyon, and he did not say no.

  10. I don’t like the rest of the Tea Party’s agenda, either.. I don’t think they are the positive force in the political landscape that some here apparently do.

  11. I think Glenn Greenwald gives an excellent analysis of most tea party member’s motives. Their hypocrisy is exactly the same as the hypocrisy of those who support Obama even as he does things they complained about when Bush did them. The real point of this lawsuit is that it attempts to set some kind of limit on dictatorial powers being claimed by Obama. IMO, the Congress should cut off funding for all the imperial wars. For example, we are secretly cluster bombing the people of Yemen.

    It does not matter what party he or she is from. It is dangerous to support a dictator. Republicans were wrong not to go after Bush for his power grab and Democrats are wrong not to go after Obama for his. This nation is at stake. Justice is a stake. Lives are at stake.

    ” For the reasons I described at length on Monday, this GOP transformation — with a few exceptions — is everything but sincere; it is partisan, opportunistic, and cynical, and it’s very hard to imagine it enduring under a GOP President (after all, the last time there was a GOP President, the party all but declared war opposition to be a form of treason: cut and run! Impeding the troops in harm’s way!! Undermining the Commander-in-Chief in a time of war!!!). But it is nonetheless a useful development. Given that the current Democratic President has proven to be so enamored of war and bombing policies — and that GOP hawks now find themselves defending Barack Obama and his foreign policies far more than they criticize them — it really is not hard to imagine, as Diehl put it, that the 2012 GOP nominee’s “criticism [of Obama’s foreign policy will] come from the anti-intervention left, rather than the hawkish right.” That seems clearly preferable to a “debate” in which each side tries to prove they’re more war-loving and bellicose than the other.

  13. Pingback: Libya: Members of Congress Challenging Constitutionality of Military Action | After the Bar

  14. Late to the party as usual. Happy Birthday Woosty, my fellow Gemini. At my age, I just tell people the most appropriate sentiment is, ” Congratulations on surviving.” But at any rate, hope your coming year is prosperous and joyful.

  15. W=c, day late like usual, happy birthday.
    And when it comes to Mus music, while this is not happy birthday, this is my choice:

  16. Les – I agree but thought you were suggesting that concern for the intent of some of the parties involved where meant as defense of Obama. I think it is possible to oppose the expansion of prez power no matter which party is in office but know that a lot of the people behind this are only in it for the politics. Those people need to be pointed out loudly now so they can’t pretend after the next election.

  17. Les

    but Obama has protected them here and overseas from investigation, while he’s been prosecuting whistle-blowers at the highest rate in decades.

    Whistleblowers Call to Rescind Obama’s ‘Transparency Award’

    Over 20 noted whistleblowers have just released a petition calling for rescinding a “Transparency Award” President Obama recently received.

    The signatories including Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers; former CIA analyst Raymond McGovern; former Pentagon analyst Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski; and former National Security Agency analyst Russ Tice.

    http://www.infozine.com/news/stories/op/storiesView/sid/47848/

  20. I am grateful to know there are still courageous members in the American Government.
    Thank you to all pursuing this important action.

Comments are closed.