Wednesday, August 28, 2013

Members of Congress insists Obama seek congressional approval in order to strike Syria

From The Hill:

More than 100 lawmakers, including 16 Democrats, have signed a letter that says President Obama would violate the Constitution by striking Syria without first getting authorization from Congress.

A total of 107 lawmakers had signed the letter as of 3 p.m. Wednesday, highlighting bipartisan interest and growing momentum in ensuring a role for Congress in any decision to use force in Syria.

“Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution,” states the letter, spearheaded by Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.).

The Speaker of the House wants a case to be made for intervention:


In a letter to the president, Boehner said the briefings key lawmakers have received so far have failed to assuage their concerns about the administration's strategy.

“I respectfully request that you, as our country’s commander-in-chief, personally make the case to the American people and Congress for how potential military action will secure American national security interests, preserve America’s credibility, deter the future use of chemical weapons, and, critically, be a part of our broader policy and strategy," Boehner wrote.

He stopped short, however, of demanding a congressional vote, even as more than 107 House members have signed a letter to the president making the case for such an authorization.
Boehner hinted that he supports retaliation following allegations Bashar Assad's forces used chemical weapons, saying the president's response had implications for America's “credibility” beyond Syria, notably in Iran. But he asked no fewer than 14 pointed questions about the long-term goals of a military response, notably regarding the risks of empowering Islamist militants and drawing Assad allies Iran and Russia into the fight.

Some House members argues that an attack would violate the War Powers Resolution:

House members demanding congressional approval for a military attack against Syria are making detailed legal arguments that ignoring Congress would violate the War Powers Resolution (WPR).

Dozens of House members are now on record as insisting that Congress must authorize military action against Syria, including more than 100 who plan to deliver a letter to the White House on Thursday.

That letter argues that the Obama administration is stretching its authority under the WPR, which was passed in 1973 and defines the circumstances under which the executive branch can commit military assets overseas.

Under the WPR, the president can "introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities" pursuant to a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization, or under a national emergency "created by attack upon the United States, its territories, or its armed forces."

In the letter to be sent Thursday, members argue that Obama has already weakened that standard in regard to Libya. It notes that in 2011, the administration's Office of Legal Counsel said Obama can rely on his constitutional power to safeguard the "national interest" by conducting limited military operations in Libya.