Will Trump Endorse Anyone in Texas GOP Senate Runoff?
AOC Predicts Gerrymandering War Between Blue and Red States
Trump Just Laid Waste to Hakeem Jeffries After His Comments About the Supreme...
Vote Blue No Matter Who? We Did Nazi That Coming
Joe Biden Throws His Support Behind Keisha Lance Bottoms for GA Governor
Scott Jennings Calls Out Seth Moulton for Suggesting Secretary Hegseth Be Executed for...
Gavin Newsom Has Some Audacity Complaining About Gas Prices
CNN's Abby Phillip Actually Asked Hard Questions on Graham Platner
Scott Jennings Schools CNN Panel on American History With the Iran War
Guess Why a Wisconsin Drag Queen Was Arrested
Scott Bessent Reveals the True State of Iran Amid the US Blockade: Like...
As Desperation Grows, Iran Considers Deploying Explosive Dolphins Against US Blockade
Republican Mayoral Candidate in LA Surges in the Polls Following Legendary Campaign Ad
President Trump Announces a 25 Percent Tariff on the EU After Trade Agreement...
DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin Reveals the True Cost of the 76-Day Partial Government...
Tipsheet

Senate Democrat: Sending Troops Back to Iraq Requires Congressional Authorization

Senate Democrat: Sending Troops Back to Iraq Requires Congressional Authorization

One of the few things that members of Congress from both political parties seem to agree upon lately is that the president does not need congressional authorization to redeploy some 300 “military advisors” to Iraq for strategic and counter-terrorism purposes. After all, the president briefed congressional leaders about his options in Iraq last week, informing them that redeploying such a small residual force was constitutional. He encountered almost no push back. Under several previously passed provisions, the White House and congressional leaders broadly agree that such an action falls well under his legal purview.

Advertisement

But not everyone does.

Writing in the pages of the Washington Post, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) argues that any executive, unilateral action by the president that sends troops into “harm’s way” without congressional authorization is unconstitutional. He explicitly quotes the “Father of the Constitution” to build his case:

The framers of the Constitution gave Congress the power to authorize war. As James Madison wrote, “The constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war to the Legislature.”

The framers also understood that a president, exercising the powers of commander in chief, might need to act before Congress in an emergency situation. But, in such a case, there must be an imminent threat to the United States, and Congress must subsequently ratify a president’s actions.

And since there isn’t an “imminent threat” to the US homeland right now, President Obama has no legal authority to take action in Iraq. At the same time, he argues, previously passed statutes have no bearing or application today:

In 2001, in response to the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress passed a broadly worded Authorization for Use of Military Force that has been interpreted by the George W. Bush and Obama administrations to authorize military action against al-Qaeda and its associated forces. Congress passed a second AUMF to authorize the Iraq War in 2002.

In the current Iraq crisis, neither authorization applies. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is not an al-Qaeda affiliate — in fact, it is openly battling with al-Qaeda in Syria — and administration officials have said that the 2002 AUMF is obsolete and should be repealed.

Advertisement

Kaine goes on to say that Congress should debate new war measures that deal with today’s global challenges -- especially in Iraq. “Ordering people to risk their lives without Washington doing the work necessary to reach a political consensus is immoral,” he wrote.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos