Latest in AUMF
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard oral argument on Tuesday in Al-Alwi v. Trump. The panel was composed of Chief Judge Merrick Garland and Judges Karen Henderson and Thomas Griffith. Sonia M. Carson argued for the government. Ramzi Kassem argued for al-Alwi.
Listen to the full audio of the argument here.
PDF version
A review of David Barron's Waging War: The Clash Between Presidents and Congress, 1776 to ISIS (Simon & Schuster, 2016).
***
The 2001 authorization for the use of military force (AUMF) authorizes the president to use force against “those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.” But presidents have steadily interpreted the
Together with David Remes, I presented Capt. Nathan Smith's challenge to the war against the Islamic State before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Oct. 27. Judge Thomas Griffith presided, with Judges David Sentelle and Raymond Randolph, joining in a wide-ranging discussion of doctrine and cases that touched on many national security law problems. While the court had officially granted 15 minutes to each side, the hearing lasted for more than an hour. The court has provided a recording of the argument.
On Oct. 30, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee heard testimony from Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary James Mattis on the Trump administration’s views regarding the need for a new authorization for the use of military force (AUMF).
The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations held a hearing on "The Authorizations for the Use of Military Force: Administration Perspective" at 5 p.m. EDT, Monday, Oct. 30.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson (read statement here) and Defense Secretary James Mattis testified.
As federal court and national security experts are noting, on Oct. 27, the D.C. Circuit will hear oral argument in Smith v. Trump (formerly Smith v. Obama). The case challenges the propriety of invoking the 2001 and 2002 authorizations for the use of military force (AUMF) to justify the war against the Islamic State (Operation Inherent Resolve).
This morning at 10am, the House Foreign Affairs Committee is holding a hearing on "Authorization for the Use of Military Force and Current Terrorist Threats." Witnesses include former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, former Legal Counsel to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Brigadier General Richard Gross (Retired), and former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center Matthew Olsen. A livestream of the hearing is available below.
A pretty remarkable development in today's House Appropriations markup on the Defense Appopriations bill. For many years, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) has been putting forward amendments intended to repeal or sunset the 2001 AUMF. They normally do not go anywhere. This morning she moved one that would terminate the 2001 AUMF in 240 days, and lo-and-behold the majority went along with it. It passed with only Kay Granger (R-TX) opposing.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing today on a new Authorization to Use Military Force Against terrorist groups. Kathleen Hicks, former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, and I were the witnesses. My written statement is here. Kathleen Hicks’ written statement is here.
I closed my opening statement as follows: