What are the President's implied powers as Commander-in-Chief? (POWER,…
What are the President's implied powers as Commander-in-Chief?
US Constitution: Divides FP powers between the President and Congress
Has the president
Pres- Commander in Chief, Negotiate treaties, Appoint Ambassadors, Congress - Declares war, Power of the Purse, Advice and Consent
AIIS2: "The president shall appoint Ambassadors", and AIIS3: "shall receieve Ambassadors" = sending an ambassador implies that their gov is seen as legitimate! Implies the power the recognised foreign governments!
Sec 2014: CUBA - Obama announces restoration of diploamtic relations with Cuba, since 1961, Congress did not really like, 6 laws impose sanctions onf Cuba, all give president some power over how to enforce them = Obama says he will ease some trade bans withotu COngress
AIIS2: Power to make treaties WITH "advice and consent of the Senate" = seems to be big catch, BUT pres has sigif FP powers, so some argue they should netotiate without Senate
ngeotiated by pres, no need for advice/consent of Senate, historically used for small agreements, BUT since WW2 they have been used more
1889-1939: 64% international agreements made were EXEC rather than treaties, vs. 1939-1989: 94%!
Congress passes bill to authorise pres to negotitate a deal, final deal must pass maj in both chambers, used a lot of trade deals -
Easier to pass, but still some checks
1988: OCTA - pres authorised to negotiate free trade agreements until June 1993. final deals to be sub to Congress in a bill
= Bush and Clintron negotiate NAFTA, Congress implemented in 1993 with NAFTA Implementation Act (234-200, 61-38) - gave pres more power? If NAFTA was a trety, it would have failed as it did not get 2/3 in the Senate
SOLE EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS:
President negotiates, Congress does nto vote! Based on pres. existin constitutional and satutory powers - CANT be used for new laws or funding, as this requires Congressional input, became very common after WW2 -
Undermines the system of checks and balances!
1953 THE BRICKER AMENDMENT: Sen John Bricker proposed amendment to iclude COngressional approval for all orders
2012 IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL: US (and allied powers) offer to lift sanctions on Iran if it agrees to limit development of nuclear tech, concern they will develop weapons
NOV 2013: Obama agrees to 6 month agreement without Congress! Could do this because some existing sanctions vs. Iran passed by exec order, AND Congressional sanctions included porvisions allowsing pres to remporarily waive some of them! (BUT cannot lift all sanctions permanently)
Treaties are the only form of international agreement actually mentioned int eh constitution, BUT now very rare - this is bc need 2/3 in Senate = difficult to pass BUT also difficult to repeal, so still used for important articles
Increase in War Powers
AIS8: Gives Congress power to declare war, BUT has only been used 5 times! Most recent is WW2! US has gone to war many times since then eg. 1950 Korean War, 1958 Lebanon, 1962 Bay of Pigs
Since Korean War, A2S2 (Commander in Chief) has been interpreted increasingly loosely - Truman called intervention in Korea a 'police action'. saying as CiC, they have to keep nation safe and so, may have to order small military operations without Congress
1973 War Powers Resolutions
: Limits pres. power to initiate military action BUT to allow for emergency, said pres could authorise military action for a 60 day period - if Congress denies this, pres has 30 days to withdraw troops, still given pres 3 months military time!
Obama argues it was unconst. when Airstrikes on Libya 2011, as part of NATO led military action to protect civilians during civil war BUT Congress tried to use War Powers Res to block further military action after 60 days, BUT unsuccessful - WH said operation did not involve sustained fighting or US ground troops, therefore War Powers Res did not apply
Drones and Missiles = Pres not limited!
2001: AUMF, response to 9/11 - allowed pres to take all necessary force against nations that aided the attacks, gave pres a blank check to wage war! Authorised attacks against groups and indivudals, not just states! Bush and Obama have used this to justify a lot of actions in Middle East (420-1) (98-0)
2014 Airstrikes: Obama announces expansion of airstrikes on ISIS = involved expanding striked into Syria for first time - said AUMF justified, even if ISIS was not hugely involveed in 9/11
Only dissent in House was D Rep Barbara Lee, aid it was giving pres blank check to attack anyone without regard to nations long term FP, economic and national security, and without time limit
Can't Congress just us Power of Purse to cut funding for war? Not politically acceptable, difficult to cut funding once troops committed, cannot risk their safety by depriving them of resources