Essay On War Powers Act

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.

Executive orders are where the president can enact laws if they need to be passed quickly and without the trouble of going through congress.[4] Executive orders are found in the clause of the U.S Constitution that says “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” [5] Executive orders are not explicitly stated in the United States Constitution, but it is a power commonly given to the president of the United States. The president is the chief of the military, and he can order troops to battle. Congress can change orders of the president, but to do that, it must be passed through congress. 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”.[1] 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. The Bay of Tonkin Incident is an example of the president having tyranny over the people by leading the nation to war when it was not

The President in foreign affairs that consist of declaring war, ratifying treaties, overseeing the appointments of the ambassadors, and finally the growth of executive power is now out of necessitates to enhance the professional, and political oversight of the executive with forging nations. This example of power is a product of the lack of the legislature initiation to check the president’s action with the use of Military Force, the USA Patriot Act, military commissions, and the updated Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ("FISA").

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. A drastic approach some Quebeckers took happened during the October Crisis. It began on October 5, 1970, with the kidnapping of James Cross, a British trade commissioner in the city of Montreal, Quebec. This was carried out by a radical separatist group, Front de Libération du Québec, often shortened to FLQ. Later Pierre Laporte, the Minister of Labour, was kidnapped also. With these acts of terrorism plaguing Quebec, Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau enacted the War Measures Act. This was the only time ever to be ever done so during a time of peace. This action is very controversial even to this day. The enactment of the War Measures Act was not justified because it removed civil rights, increased fears and very little communication between parties.

Undoubtedly, The President is the furthermost known person in a country due to the position he occupies and many times his actual power has been questioned. Two distinct perspectives arose to describe the president’s power as persuasion and unilateral power.

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. As James Madison put it in Federalist No.51, “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.” The branches were intended to check each other lest they become too powerful. If the president claimed supreme war power as commander in chief, he could essentially go to war without a war declaration, as has historically been the case. James K. Polk, for example, acted out of the ambition to acquire new territory and used his commander in chief entitlement to instigate the Mexican American war by stationing troops on the border. The War Powers Resolution hinders “imperial presidents taking America to war… without public approval or the constitutionally required legislative sanction.” In another case: “Despite assurances to the American public that Cambodia's neutrality was being respected, it was discovered that secret bombing raids on North Vietnamese forces in Cambodia had taken place since March of 1969; this caused the public to question trust of the government.” (American Pageant) This is far from what was intended by the framers. In the declaration it says, “Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the

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. The Stolen Valor Act prohibits the action of falsely representing oneself as having received any U.S. military decoration or medal. Alvarez’s case was brought before the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, where he made the claim

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.

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.

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. If assistance is needed the president can invoke the authority and enforce Laws.

The questions of whether or not the President has authority to use the military without congress first having declared war has proven to be a great source of conflict throughout history. The confusion comes from the different interpretations of the clauses. Since the Korean War, it has been accepted that the executive powers are that “The president has the power to initiate hostilities without consulting Congress” (libertyclassroom.com). This is often misinterpreted and has been used to expand executive authority and essentially make war without a congressional declaration of war. Perhaps the first example of this misuse of power dates back to the presidency of John Adams. In 1798, he was authorized by congress to seize any vessels that were sailing to French ports, however, he acted unilaterally and ordered for any ship sailing to or from a French port to be seized and thus started the still undeclared Quasi War (libertyclassroom.com). Also, in June 1950, at the beginning of the Korean War, Harry Truman decided to deploy American forces to Korea without congressional approval just because he deemed it as an emergency (p.321). This wasn’t the first or last time a president had over expanded his constitutional powers, however Congress eventually began to try and combat

“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.

The Monroe Doctrine is one of the most influential foreign policies made by an American President in our nation’s history. It strongly defined the principle of American exclusivity and European non-interference in North and South America. In Europe, the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 marked the disintegration of the Spanish empire in the New World. Between 1815 and 1822, Argentina, Venezuela, and Chile declared their independence, and broke away from colonialism. The Monroe administration recognized Argentina, Chile, Peru, Colombia and Mexico as independent colonies in 1822. After Spain and Portugal defeated Napoleon in 1815, they made arduous efforts to reclaim their former colonies in Latin America. There was increased concern in the

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. Fulfilling of these aspects give preconditions