Throughout history, presidents and congresses have jockeyed for control over war powers. Article I of the Constitution grants Congress the exclusive authority to declare war, while Article II names the President as “Commander in Chief” of the army, navy and militia. The jockeying reached a watershed moment of congressional assertiveness with the passage of the 1973 War Powers Act. Since then, however, presidential war-making power has been in a state of near-constant expansion—an expansion only accelerated by overseas counterterrorism actions and recent presidential military actions in Libya and Syria.
Latest in War Powers
The U.S. may have attempted to kill a second Quds Force commander simultaneous with the Soleimani attack, this time in Yemen. The situation underscores the confusion that besets the self-defense justification.
A new Lawfare Institute e-book, "Context and Consequences of the Soleimani Strike: A Lawfare Compilation," is now available on Kindle.
The War Powers Resolution provides expedited procedures for a very specific type of legislation. This limits how Congress can use them in regard to Iran.
Rep.
The United States—through presidential aggrandizement, as well as congressional delegation and acquiescence—has given the president discretion to use force in ways that can easily lead to a massive war.
The Soleimani strike was likely within the president’s domestic legal authority to pursue. But in certain ways, it may push that authority’s limits.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) has introduced a Senate resolution under the War Powers Resolution directing "the President to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military" within 30 days of the enactment of the resolution.
In Iraq, the Trump administration’s military response to a fatal attack on U.S. personnel has triggered a new political crisis. The U.S.-Iraq relationship may not escape unscathed.
The Millard Fillmore administration’s diplomatic machinations toward Hawaii are a curious example of the executive branch regarding itself as constitutionally empowered to threaten war but constrained from unilaterally carrying out that threat.
A new set of essays explores the state and possible trajectory of modern war powers.