Fixing the War Powers

1992 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Kelly
Keyword(s):  
War Powers

American War Powers and the Lockean Federative Power

2015 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 388
Author(s):  
Benjamin Thompson
Keyword(s):  
War Powers

scholarly journals Biden Administration Relies on Constitutional Authority and Unwilling or Unable Theory of Self-Defense for Airstrikes in Syria

2021 ◽  
Vol 115 (3) ◽  
pp. 567-572
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Legal Authority ◽  
Military Policy ◽  
Presidential Approval ◽  
War Powers ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
Drone Strikes ◽  
Individual Self

On February 25, 2021, the United States conducted a strike targeting Iranian-backed militia group facilities in Syria. The strike, which came in response to a February 15, 2021 attack on U.S. interests in Iraq, marked the Biden administration's first known exercise of executive war powers. As domestic authority for the strike, President Joseph Biden, Jr. cited his authority under Article II of the U.S. Constitution and did not rely on the 2001 or 2002 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMFs). For international legal authority, Biden relied on individual self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter, stating that Syria was “unwilling or unable” to prevent further attacks on the United States by these non-state actors within its territory. The strikes garnered mixed reactions from Congress, where efforts are underway to repeal or reform extant AUMFs as well as the War Powers Resolution (WPR). The Biden administration is also undertaking a review of current U.S. military policy on the use of force, and during this process, it has prohibited drone strikes outside of conventional battlefields, absent presidential approval.

War Powers

1983 ◽  
Vol 83 (8) ◽  
pp. 2117 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Taylor Reveley ◽  
Edward Keynes
Keyword(s):  
War Powers

Constitutional Dysfunction on Trial

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jasmine Farrier
Keyword(s):  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Public Deliberation ◽  
Federal System ◽  
War Powers ◽  
Everyday Politics ◽  
Federal Judges ◽  
Legislative Processes

In an original assessment of all three branches, this book reveals a new way in which the American federal system is broken. Turning away from the partisan narratives of everyday politics, the book diagnoses the deeper and bipartisan nature of imbalance of power that undermines public deliberation and accountability, especially on war powers. By focusing on the lawsuits brought by Congressional members that challenge presidential unilateralism, the book provides a new diagnostic lens on the permanent institutional problems that have undermined the separation of powers system in the last five decades, across a diverse array of partisan and policy landscapes. As each chapter demonstrates, member lawsuits are an outlet for frustrated members of both parties who cannot get their House and Senate colleagues to confront overweening presidential action through normal legislative processes. But these lawsuits often backfire—leaving Congress as an institution even more disadvantaged. The book argues these suits are more symptoms of constitutional dysfunction than the cure. It shows federal judges will not and cannot restore the separation of powers system alone. Fifty years of congressional atrophy cannot be reversed in court.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document