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. 50 U.S. Code § 1541 - Purpose and policy | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
Only congress can declare war or pass a statute, and there have been no attacks on the US that create a national emergency. There is no legal basis for the President to attack Iran without specific congressional authorization.
So if Iran targets US military personnel in Syria or Iraq jerk offs like Kaine will not vote to retaliate?
That mook needs to buy a new suit and sell used cars somewhere.
Who knows how he would vote but Iran has not attacked the US so I am not sure if Trump authorizing a strike against Iran is constitutional though I think it is as long as he reports to congress within a specified time period. Time for me to go to Grok
Ultimately courts have refused to rule on presidential war powers, so the president is pretty much free to attack anyone at anytime with total impunity. Unless there is a 2/3 majority in the senate who are willing to remove him from office, nothing much will happen.
Obama made that situation clear with the NATO bombing campaign on Libya. A resolution supporting the attack failed in the House. Obama attacked anyway and never bothered to follow the provisions of the war powers act.
Well, other than the 1973 War Powers Act (50 U.S.C. Ch 33) that is. He can send a B2 to drop a GBU-57 on Fordo and not even tell Congress about it for 48 hours.
The president can legally do that if only if there is “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.”
In the case of Obama, he brazenly ignored the law to launch the bombing campaign against Libya. Congress and the courts did nothing to stop that.
It is worse than that. Trump is unlikely to survive if he actually stuck to his principles and refused to fight the war.
A “lone gunman” killed Kennedy after he opposed the Israel nuclear program, ended the Bay of Pigs invasion, and proposed a peace plan with the Soviets. Nixon was removed after signed arms control agreements with the Soviet Union that cost the military enormous sums. Trump has already survived two impeachments, multiple sham trials, and two assassination attempts by “lone gunmen”. He may have decided that attempting to delay an inevitable war is not the hill to die on.
Nonetheless, a war powers resolution would at least force a debate and may force documentation of the pretexts for war. It may delay the war to the point where it either obvious that Israel has won without US combat forces, or the war is already lost and US intervention is obviously futile. It would force a vote, which means members of congress must take responsibility for the war.
Of course the vast majority of Congress is in the pocket of interests related to the military and Israel so I am not holding my breath for any real change in policy.
The first six minutes of this video explains how the US decision to fight this war has little to do with either the President or congress. Presidents come and go. Policies stay the same.
That is a misreading of the WPA, Its a deliberate one, not by you, but by successive administrations who read the reporting requirements and claim they are authorization even though the act says they are not.
The problem with the WPA is that there are no consequences when it is violated. Well, except that it could start war that Congress would have liked to not be forced to authorize, that is. So far, we have been lucky.
Trump is fully within his authority to take out Fordow without congressional approval.
As to the resolution, if this were as cut and dry as you believe there would be no need for a resolution. As to the resolution, it would be a simple resolution with no force of law. It is simply for show.
