U.S. Attacks Syria

[Belsnickel]

(04-16-2018, 06:26 PM)Dill Wrote: Yes, that is what the WPR says, but every president since Ford has violated these requirements. There are so many ways to maneuver around them with "special" interpretations of statutory authorizations and disagreements as to when exactly the timeline kicks in. The president only has to "consult" or "report" before starting any action. In effect, the President, not Congress, has first rights in deciding when the conditions have been fulfilled. 

The #1 problem in every case is that Congress does little to nothing whenever it is violated.  Congress has the final say in whether a military action is constitutional/legal, and it can order the President to remove troops out of whatever theater with a concurrent resolution (they can also defund specific actions), but the president's party almost always fights/blocks any Congressional control of their president's foreign policy actions. (As you know, since the Cold War Consensus broke down it has been really hard to get both parties and both houses working together. They did for a year or so after 9/11, but the Iraq invasion destroyed bipartisanship again.) Also, there is good reason for not wanting to restrict a president's ability to react quickly. 

Here I think Trump is on some legal ground if he cites previous presidential actions, and extra-legally he can trust his Congress to prevent any repercussions beyond loud Dem complaints. They could even create authorization after the fact.

I don't disagree with any of this. That is the reality of the situation. I have always had an issue with it. I do think, though, that the "good reason for not wanting to restrict a president's ability to react quickly" is taken care of by point three in the WPR. I would like to see us rein in the way the Executive has used the WPR in recent decades.