Always great to see you all. If you’re interested in the constitutional debate over declaring war, there is abundant material available. As with too many issues, however, our views on such things tend to depend where we sit, rather than what the Constitution says. Here’s a nice little outtake from an analysis by the Constitution Center (links below):
In modern times, however, Presidents have used military force without formal declarations or express consent from Congress on multiple occasions. For example, President Truman ordered U.S. forces into combat in Korea; President Reagan ordered the use of military force in, among other places, Libya, Grenada and Lebanon; President George H.W. Bush directed an invasion of Panama to topple the government of Manual Noriega; and President Obama used air strikes to support the ouster of Muammar Qaddafi in Libya. Some commentators argue that, whatever the original meaning of the Declare War Clause, these episodes (among others) establish a modern practice that allows the President considerable independent power to use military force.
And while there are a few true blue believers in congressional authority in these instances (“these wars were all illegal” — some libertarian), the de facto reality of American government is that most of the modern era’s conflicts were fought without authorization, without a declaration of war, and without serious effort by Congress to claw back the prerogatives some insist it has. But, the War Powers Resolution, I hear whispered. Well, as my husband (an actual lawyer) likes to tell me, even presidents who once argued that War Powers is legal eventually changed their minds. Ahem, Jimmy Carter. No White House has recognized War Powers as binding or constitutional, and that’s unlikely to change.
There are objections to what our President is doing re Venezuela, including from conservatives, that are very worth reading, and educational for those who merely pretend to be lawyers (moi). But the issue here is not that Donald Trump is using military force, it is, like the question of tariffs, the justification he uses. Nonetheless, there are remedies to an objection to a president’s use of force: Congress can cut off funding for the action, well within its constitutional prerogatives. Have you seen that happen? Discussed? What about when Obama invaded Libya? Then? Nah. Congress is asleep at the switch. But that’s a different problem.
Thank you Douglas Ollivant, David Galinsky, Lana, and many others for tuning in! We’ll see you next week. 💕
SHOWNOTES
Some war powers texts:
