Below is my column in Fox.com on the move this coming week to introduce a war powers resolution to end the attacks in Iran. The task, however, will be far more challenging in light of the escalation of hostilities. With the loss of American personnel, the choice is even more stark politically for these members. President Donald Trump has left Congress with only fight or flight options.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.) promised to force a vote on a war powers resolution to bar further prosecution of the war against Iran. Republicans such as Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) have joined in the call to bar further hostilities. These members are certainly within their rights to call for such resolutions and the Framers wanted such debates to occur in Congress. However, it is too late to make this cat walk backwards. While there are good-faith reasons to oppose the commencement of the attacks, the United States is now in close combat with Iran. Drafting a war powers resolution at this stage would be nearly impossible without putting U.S. personnel and allies at risk.
The Constitution divides war powers between the legislative and executive branches. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution declares that “the President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states.” However, under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, only Congress may declare wars.
The result has been over two centuries of conflicts between presidents and Congress. Presidents are clearly authorized to respond to threats to national security by commencing military operations. Past presidents, including Democratic presidents such as President Barack Obama and Joe Biden, have asserted the unilateral power to attack other nations when they believe that combat is warranted by national security.
The War Powers Act was the response of Congress to try to curtail such unilateral authority. Overriding the veto of President Richard Nixon, Congress mandated that presidents must consult with them and cease all combat operations within 60 days if Congress has not approved the use of force. Presidents, and some academics, have long argued that the WPA is unconstitutional in part or in whole.
Now to the current conflict. The sixty-day period is likely ample for what President Donald Trump is planning for Iran since he has ruled out putting American boots on the ground in the conflict. That is why Kaine, Massie, and others are moving to cut off authorization immediately.
The problem is that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards are now launching a full-fledged attack with thousands of missiles against the United States, its assets, and its allies around the world. It has also declared that the key Strait of Hormuz is now closed — potentially choking off twenty percent of the world’s oil reserves.
So how are these members going to draft a War Powers Resolution?
The WPA requires that
“The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.”
Kaine and others insist that hostilities were not imminent when we attacked. Even if that were true, they are now. We are in a full engagement with Iran with mounting injuries and destruction. All threats are now imminent and all attacks are arguably preemptive.
WPR specifically allows for the use of force in “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.” Those attacks are now occurring.
In these circumstances, it would be nearly impossible to limit the war powers of the President without putting American personnel or allies at risk. After decapitating the leadership in Iran, Iranian assets are clearly operating under prior orders in a decentralized structure. That means that the United States must neutralize any and all assets that they can find in preemptive attacks while trying to further degrade the command structure of the Iranian government.
Is Congress going to require the United States to only act responsively, rather than preemptively, to attacks? That would be absurd from an operational standpoint.
The most a resolution could demand is the cessation of hostilities once imminent threats are removed. That would be practically meaningless given the fact that hostilities will continue so long as the current Iranian government remains in power. Both the IRG and de facto Iranian leader Ali Larijani pledged that they are now unleashing every asset against the United States and its allies. Larijani declared “They stabbed heart of the nation, their heart will be stabbed too.”
The other problem with the resolution is the glaring disconnect for Democrats from their silence in the face of Democratic presidents using the same claimed inherent authority as President Donald Trump.
President Barack Obama (and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) attacked the capital city of Libya and that country’s military assets without any imminent threat to the United States. Many of the current members were entirely silent. After calling for the rescission of the broadly interpreted 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), Biden then claimed that same authority to launch his own attacks on Iraq and Yemen.
The choice now for Democrats is either a senseless or suicidal resolution. It can either resolve to end hostilities as soon as practically possible (an objective already stated by the Administration) or it can actually seek to limit the Administration’s options amid full-fledged war.
In other words, Trump (like some of his predecessors) has boxed in Congress. Presidents are allowed to initiate hostilities, and Congress will not end them by limiting our options. The choice is now to finish the fight or flee the battlefield.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the New York Times bestselling “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
It seems to me that if Trump had consulted with Congress or its members (which would have to include at least some Democrats) especially in this present woke-Dem era, the chances are almost excellent that somehow the plan would be ‘leaked’ to public media sources and that would have notably intensified the danger to US forces involved. So Trump didn’t take that risk. Chez Odysseus
my buddy makes 0ver $22164💸 a m0nth doing this and she c0nvinced me to try. Single M0m Reveals How She Earns 75k/Yr W0rking 10 Hrs/Week From H0me The p0ssibility with this is endless……..……..…………..…..…….… https://goto.now/QiHYA
“Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.) promised to force a vote on a war powers resolution to bar further prosecution of the war against Iran.” (JT)
The U.S. is (thankfully) destroying a despotic government that is the world’s greatest state sponsor of terrorism. And now that we are finally doing what should have been done 40 years ago, some politicians want America to take a knee.
Shameful.
Since it’s blatantly unconstitutional for Congress to abdicate its core Article 1 authority to the Executive Branch – couldn’t any member of Congress file a Writ of Mandamus to force Congress to check presidents?
Wouldn’t any so-called “Originalist” support making Congress do their oath-sworn duty? Why hasn’t any plaintiff filed a Writ of Mandamus against some members of Congress?
Congress’ Article 1, Sec. 8 authority is not a mandate on the President because the latter can veto legislative action, such as a Congressional declaration of war. However, a determined Congress could override the President’s veto, but if the Commander-in-Chief still refuses to go to war, the Constitution wisely DOES NOT give Congress Commander-in-Chief powers (gee, I wonder why?). Therefore, the only avenue left to a Congress that is convinced that war is necessary would be to remove the President through impeachment and trial. But then, by that time, if circumstances were truly dire, the Nation would probably have already been defeated by the enemy while the impeachment and trial were being sorted out.
Since in my experience the Constitution is extremely congruent in all its provisions- only obtuse and/or willful misinterpretation create incongruence in our founding document- commenter, GASLIT-the tv series’ constitutional interpretation is in error, i.e., Congress’ power to declare war is not a mandate on the presidency, but rather a sanctioned sphere of congressional legislating that should not and cannot lawfully interfere with constitutional Commander-in-Chief powers, as well as other presidential powers that Congress has consistently leached from the Presidency.
“However, it is too late to make this cat walk backwards.”
Exactly. As Turley suggests, among other (presumably lesser) goals for this attack was enticing prominent Dems to take a position that will prove to be politically unpopular. Kaine swallowed the bait in one gulp. I had, and still have, serious practical reservations about this attack in terms of its ultimate effect on the balance of power after midterm elections. I think it is a big gamble. However, I am forced to admit that in those terms, so far, so good. We shall see what unfolds over the next month…
Jon, your mods r blocking legit comments
“blocking legit comments”
Maybe. There has been a tremendous amount of instability on this blog going back many, many months wrt commenting, including the cyclical disappearance and reappearance of the ability for unregistered commentators to leave a consistent screen name. I have gone back and forth with my opinion about whether that is malicious censorship, or merely incompetent administration. At times I think I see evidence of POV suppression, at other times it appears to be more or less random. I still do not know the definitive answer to that. YMMV.
my buddy makes 0ver $22164💸 a m0nth doing this and she c0nvinced me to try. Single M0m Reveals How She Earns 75k/Yr W0rking 10 Hrs/Week From H0me The p0ssibility with this is endless……………………..…….… https://goto.now/QiHYA
This is a falling-of-the-Berlin-wall moment.
Unfortunately for you, stuck in 1989, it is no such thing.
“This is a falling-of-the-Berlin-wall moment.”
You might want to consider the present condition of the German republic before going overboard in celebration of that moment. It seems very debatable to me whether an objective analysis would indicate that West Germany prevailed over the East, long term. Just saying…
Leftist evil in a nutshell:
https://instapundit.com/779681
Rightist insanity in one line.
no evil murderous commies allowed!
The dems don’t care how stupid the stuff they do or say as long as they oppose Trump. Unfortunately, many follow this line of thinking.
The Globalist Plan to Collapse Everything
To Usher In A New World Order
In Their Own Words
by Allan Paul Roberts
This book is very well researched and easy to read! I love the QR codes throughout the book that expose the truth. This book was eye opening for me and a “must read” for anyone who has been searching for real answers to what has been going on in the world. I would recommend everyone read this book! – Matthew S.
Must read book for every household — Allan’s book is phenomenal and is a must-read for every household. Allan does a wonderful job explaining how our systems have been taken over by nefarious forces and how we can avert their plans. This book is easy to read, has engaging and explanatory images as well as QR codes linking to a variety of sources that helps to detail Allan’s points. I give it 5 stars for all of the reasons above and for that fact that it is a book that we all can benefit from reading. – Lance
The lack of political understanding by Turley is breathtaking.
This isn’t intended to stop Trump because the Democrats know it cannot stop Trump. Trump won’t care and will do whatever he wants regardless of laws, judgments, or the Constitution. Trump attacked the enemy of three countries that put $3-4 Billion in cash or property into Trump’s control. Quid pro quo. His cooperation with Bibi is a follow on to aggreements to pave over the crushed and shattered civilians buried in Gaza and build a Trump resort on the corpses.
This bill is to expose the Republicans for the warmongers they are. To apply pressure ahead of the mid-terms.
To get them on record as supporting a war that is a distraction from the Epstein files.
They should be proud to show their support. I wonder if the voters will see it the same when the flag draped coffins start coming back and images of the bodies of children and civilians pile up in the news.
^ DNC/TDS paid troll. Ignore. ^
“The lack of political understanding by Turley is breathtaking. ” The infantile belief of Democrat Tranny Furry Boyz that they have any credibility outside of the Democrat Biden Bubble would be amusing, if it weren’t so pathetic. They actually know that – which is why they do the Democrat Defecate To Deflect And Disappear….
RELEASE THE BIDEN/PELOSI/OBAMA/WEINSTEIN FILES!!!!!
LOL
Libs put 21 trillion in cash under their control allegedly to boost European resistance to the Soviet Union. There hasn’t been a Soviet Union for 35 years.
“………………….a distraction from the Epstein files.
I laughed at the stupendously naive fools who are running about claiming authority they do not have under the War Powers Act. If my memory serves me right this war started November 1979 when the Islamic Republic invaded the United States Embassy an took 53 Americans as hostage, the United States signed the Algiers Accords on January 19, 1981 under the conditions *Iran would receive 8 billion dollars of frozen assets and *America would not interfere in Iran’s internal affairs as two highlights, twenty minutes after President Reagan became president the hostages were released. Since then, Iran has been nothing but a nocuous supplier of terror to its own public and anywhere the vile serpent could take a bite.
Finally complements to the President and staff, and the War department for not fooling around, I only hope they do not acquiesce to anything other than Unconditional Surrender, a nickname used of President Grant when he would accept nothing but from General Buckner at Fort Donelson, and General Lee after the fall of Petersburg Virginia. I believe War has changed drastically since the end of WWII and the creation of a Bomb of unimaginable portions. This change has enticed many Tyrants in a quest to obtain this warfare weapon, those that have it seem to understand the dire consequences of it use and avoid approaching the red-line towards Armageddon. Zealots praying for the annihilation of non-believers see nothing but a new beginning.
Good comment, GW, with a dose of history no less.
” If my memory serves me right this war started November 1979 when the Islamic Republic invaded the United States Embassy an took 53 Americans as hostage”
Not exactly. If you want to be historically accurate, this war began in 1953 when our wonderful, growing, deep state apparatus, mainly in the form of the CIA, instigated a coup in Iran to overthrow Mohammed Mossadegh, who was democratically elected Prime Minister in 1951, in order to allow Great Britain to continue to pump oil form Iranian territory without fair compensation (GB was evidently still too weakened from WWII at that time to do the deed themselves). We installed a fairly brutal dictator, Reza Pahlavi, supporting his claim to the so-called “Peacock Throne” as the virtual dictator of Iran. Resentment of Pahlavi’s reign led directly to the events of 1979 that you describe.
Are comments blocked?
Why did WordPress deny previous comments and allow this one?
And then block the one that is missing here with the comment: 429 Too Many Posts?
WordPress blocked the content and not a post that was one too many.
I doubt anyone will care about the attacks. It is Trump and the Democrats are going after him because it is him. This is the Monty Python skit about a dead parrot. Reality does not matter. It will not stop Trump.