The constitution attempts to evenly distribute powers between the executive and legislative branches of the federal government by providing the president or the commander-in-chief the power to control and supervise the military upon approval by congress, who have the power to declare war and to support the armed forces. The subject of debate regarding the act is whether the president has the authority to send military troops to war without congressional approval. The way the war powers act was written makes it difficult to decipher approximately how much power is the president privileged in the war-making process. According to the constitution congress have the powers to authorize war by formally granting letters that verify and confirm the …show more content…
The main purpose of the act was to have the president and congress approach war efforts with “collective judgement,” yet the act itself seems to allow the president to bypass congress just as how presidents Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, and Richard Nixon did in the Korean and Vietnam Wars. The act was supposed to correct the errors of such wars, but it really does not address the issue of powers between the executive and legislative branches effectively. In essence the president can declare war in the emergency when the United States is under attack, such as the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York and the Pentagon however, he is restricted from actually enacting war, meaning he can only say that there will be war, but he cannot start organizing and sending troops to hostile countries without the formal consent of congress. Therefore, the war powers act attempts to decrease the president’s power to enact war, but it violates the constitution and bypasses congressional authorization for war by permitting the president to send troops to hostile countries for 90
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
War Power Reform When it comes to war-making powers, both the legislative and the executive branches play a major role determining the course of action. Constitutionally the legislative branch has the power to declare war, but the president (executive branch), without Congress’s permission, can “make” war. This is due to the War Powers Resolution, which was enacted by Congress in 1973 to keep the president in check.
In support of the notion that the Supreme Court of Canada erred in upholding the Order-in-Council which permitted the forcible removal of “Japanese Canadian” from Canada, according to the Order in Council the word “deportation” means the “removal, pursuant to the authority of this Order (7355), of any person from any place in Canada”. This is a process of being sent away from a particular country based on legal reasons. But in this case, the Japanese were not foreigners in Canada but rather they were citizens before Canada invoked the War Measure Act. The deportation of the Japanese Canadians in 1945 was as a result of the World War II, which led to the suspicion by the Canadian government that the Japanese race was an ally with the German government. On the 15th of December 1945, Orders were made based on the War Measures act to remove all native Japanese and any other persons that is related to the Japanese race from Canada.
The constitution is quite vague and often needs defining. The War Powers act, while primarily insuring collective judgment, also provides a necessary definition for the war powers. The war powers are split between the two, and the only provision directly concerning the matter in Article II of the Constitution is that the president is the commander in chief of the armed forces. What does that entail? If the president could just freely use the troops with no respect for congressional authority, he would never find the need to seek a congressional war declaration, which would be entirely to his advantage and allow him to act unilaterally, which is definitely not how our framers intended our government to work.
Of the many roles the president plays for the American government, acting as the commander in chief is very important for the common good. The commander-in-chief 's main tasks are to leave the United States military, make decisions in times of war and to control the Armed Forces. However, to prevent excessive military control, checks and balances only allow Congress to declare war, not the
War is a state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different ups within a nation or state. Like several wars the United States has fought, this war had its strong supporters and its critics. Three reasons why the United States was NOT justified in going to war with Mexico are: President Polk believed in Manifest Destiny while others didn’t believe in him or God. U.S. should have never crossed when Mexico didn’t give permission. Slave owners brought slaves even though it was Slave-free land.
The powers of the president aren’t very strict because the other branches watch to see what they are doing. The powers included: making laws, signing treaties, appointing judges, filling up vacancies, appointing Ambassadors, and granting reprieves and pardons. Some presidents used the powers well, while others did not. The one president that used them the greatest was Washington, the greatest, and the first. He wielded the powers to impact the growing United States most effectively by signing treaties to enemies, passing acts,and trying out the National Bank.
Was the enactment of the War Measures Act during the October Crisis Justified? When one thinks of a terrorist attack, Canada is not usually the first one to come to mind. Canada is usually regarded as a very peaceful country. But Canada was not always peaceful internally; in fact it had raging internal battles with the French wanting independence.
Similarly, the President ordinarily enjoys broader authority and initiative in foreign affairs. If Congress can constrain the President's use of his inherent Commander in Chief or foreign affairs powers, it follows that Congress can apply at least as strong constraints to the removal power, an unenumerated, allegedly inherent, domestic power. What this has resulted in is the essential ability of the President to order forces into hostilities to repel invasion or counter an attack, without a formal declaration of war. A declaration of war by the Congress places the Unites States at war, but absent a declaration of war, the President can react to acts of war in an expedient fashion as he sees fit.
In the time that an executive order exists, or troops movements are made, irreparable damage can be done before the congress can fix the president’s mistakes. An example of this is in the Vietnam War. President Lyndon B. Johnson ordered an attack on North Vietnam after three “unprovoked” North Vietnamese cruisers attacked a United States boat on a “standard patrol”. The boat was actually on a signalling intelligence mission far into Vietnamese waters. The United States was forced to go to war after the first United States attack, as Vietnam was planning on fighting back.
In the Constitution of the United States entrench a requirement and action to have a profession, which ensure the protection and safety of the Nation and State, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, …, provide for the common defence” . Basically, this statement is the presumption, that part of society gain a mandate to render an essential obligation to the Nation in a specific area, in particular case this is a defence. In order to fulfill stated obligation, part of society must have the necessary knowledge and skills. Next, they have to ensure and gain public trust and autonomy in their action. Finally, set high moral standards that reflect the values of society.
In 2007, the respondent Xavier Alvarez attended a meeting as a board member in Claremont, California, where he introduced himself as the following: “I’m a retired marine of 25 years. I retired in the year 2001. Back in 1987, I was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor” (United States v Alvarez 1). In fact, Mr. Alvarez had never received said award, nor had he served in the United States Armed Forces. As a result of making said false statement, Alvarez was indicted under the Stolen Valor Act.
Expressed powers are powers granted to the president by the constitution. There are quite a few powers that are bestowed upon the president. Budgeting is one of them; the president has the power in taking the initiative in advising and executing budget priorities. An example of this from the book is “ the president could rein in congressional spending by impounding funds”(losco 310). Another power is Law Enforcement, normally Law Enforcement goes to the state and local government but they have grown to work on bigger responsibilities.
“Is war ever justified?”, is a question with its solution first originating from Christian theology. Saint Augustine was the first individual to offer a theory on this, and introduced the “Just War Theory”, which was later revised by Saint Thomas Aquinas, creating just 3 criteria to be met in order for a war to be just: “War needed to be waged by legitimate authority, have a just cause, and have the right intentions”. Since then, the “Just War Theory” was been used by many to justify their wars, however, there many other factors that were not taken into consideration that could be used to justify a war. I feel that war is justified and will be looking into points that are for the justification of war. War is justified when there is a “just cause”, and when it is used as a “last resort”.