4/7/2024 0 Comments Commander in chief clauseThese scholars tend to construe the Clause narrowly, asserting that the Founders gave the President the title to preserve civilian supremacy over the military, not to provide additional powers outside of a Congressional authorization or declaration of war. Some scholars believe the Commander in Chief Clause confers expansive powers on the President, but others argue that even if that is the case, the Constitution does not define precisely the extent of those powers. The questions of whether and to what extent the President has the authority to use the military absent a Congressional declaration of war have proven to be sources of conflict and debate throughout American history. 7 (1971).Article II Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the Commander in Chief clause, states that "he President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States." 9 (1967) (Bartlett) War Powers Legislation: Hearings Before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 92d Cong., 1st sess. Commitments to Foreign Powers: Hearings Before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 90th Cong., 1st sess. Ely, War and Responsibility: Constitutional Lessons of the Vietnam War and its Aftermath (1993) U.S. Firmage, To Chain the Dog of War (1989), F.J. Stevenson, Legal Adviser, Department of State), 120 (Professor Moore), 175 (Assistant Attorney General Rehnquist). (1970), 1 (Under Secretary of State Katzenbach), 90 (J. 43 (1969) Documents Relating to the War Powers of Congress, The President’s Authority as Commander in Chief and the War in Indochina, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 91st Congress, 2d sess. 28 (1969) Quincy Wright, The Power of the Executive to Use Military Forces Abroad, 10 Va. Moore, The National Executive and the Use of the Armed Forces Abroad, 21 Naval War College Rev. Meeker, The Legality of United States Participation in the Defense of Viet Nam, 54 Dep’t State Bull. Though Congress asserted itself in some respects, it never really managed to confront the President’s power with any sort of effective limitation, until the 1970s.ġ Leonard C. The President had the duty and the power to repeal sudden attacks and act in other emergencies, and in his role as Commander in Chief he was empowered to direct the armed forces for any purpose specified by Congress. Opponents of such expanded presidential powers have contended, however, that the authority to initiate war was not divided between the Executive and Congress but was vested exclusively in Congress. forces to South Viet Nam is required, and that military measures against the source of Communist aggression in North Viet Nam are necessary, he is constitutionally empowered to take those measures. He has also the constitutional responsibility for determining what measures of defense are required when the peace and safety of the United States are endangered. Under our Constitution it is the President who must decide when an armed attack has occurred. In the SEATO treaty, for example, it is formally declared that an armed attack against Viet Nam would endanger the peace and security of the United States. An attack on a country far from our shores can impinge directly on the Nation’s security. In the 20th century, the world has grown much smaller. In 1787 the world was a far larger place, and the framers probably had in mind attacks upon the United States. These duties carry very broad powers, including the power to deploy American forces abroad and commit them to military operations when the President deems such action necessary to maintain the security and defense of the United States. He holds the prime responsibility for the conduct of United States foreign relations. Under the Constitution, the President, in addition to being Chief Executive, is Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |