ISIS

Obama Wages Unconstitutional War, Amash Blames Congressional Leaders

"It's irresponsible & immoral."

|

Amash
Gage Skidmore / Flickr

As noted by other Reason writers, U.S. forces have begun bombing ISIS targets in Syria on the orders of President Obama—even though the president has no legitimate power to give such an order, absent authorization from Congress.

W. James Antle III explains why the White House's self-justifications are clearly illogical:

The Obama administration apparently believes it has the legal justification to attack ISIS under the resolution that authorized the war on terror in 2001. But that law quite specifically covers "those nations, organizations, or persons" that "planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons."

"On its face this is an implausible argument because the 2001 AUMF requires a nexus to al Qaeda or associated forces of al Qaeda fighting the United States," Robert Chesney, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, told The Daily Beast. "Since ISIS broke up with al Qaeda it's hard to make that argument."

Even the Bush administration accepted that it needed a separate authorization of force to go to war in Iraq, even though some of its officials and defenders wereasserting a connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein's regime. Meanwhile, President Obama is winding down the war most directly associated with the 2001 law: Afghanistan.

Antle concludes by insisting that Congress is obligated to do more to restrain the president—a sentiment shared by Rep. Justin Amash (R-Mich.). Amash took to Twitter to blast do-nothing Congressional leadership in the wake of the Syrian bombings:

It's irresponsible & immoral that instead of debating & voting on war, congressional leaders chose to recess Congress for nearly two months.

— Justin Amash (@repjustinamash) September 23, 2014

But, as I explained previously, most Congressmen seem more concerned about the political ramifications of casting a potentially toxic vote on the war than about exercising their governmental duties.

Advertisement

NEXT: Vid: Chris Hedges at Flood Wall Street: "Capitalism Exploits Humans"

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Osama bin Laden succeeded beyond his wildest dreams.

    1. In a bizarre way, yes. United States is either already arming and training Al Qaeda, or about to, in order to fight ISIS. We’ve come full circle.

      (Ahrar Al-Sham, AQ affiliated Islamist group had their leader assassinated by ISIS recently because they started dialog with ‘moderate’ Syrian rebels. Whatever weapons US provides to the ‘moderates’ will flow to their Al Qaeda allies, its just operational necessity).

    2. It doesn’t help that no one can actually be bothered to learn something about how he planned to do exactly this, drag the U.S. into chronic, unwinnable warfare.

      1. *chronic, unwinnable warfare.*

        It’s only unwinnable because we lack the will to do what’s necessary to win it.

        1. Nukes?

          I guess that’s “winning”… But what have you won at that point?

  2. Sorry, reposting from a previous thread. But I’m wondering what people think.

    I don’t know if it’s been discussed by other commenters in the prior ISIS bombing threads, but it just suddenly hit me. The Obama administration is fucking Genius. Utter Genius. Whenever I think they’re comprised of semi-literate retards, I realize that somewhere– at least on the political operative side, these people are playing serious chess while the rest of us are playing checkers.

    He just ordered a bombing campaign, a new front in the War on Terror, if you will– and while I know that for the left, it’s a genetically built-in skill to blame everything on Bush, but even this one is tough to pin entirely on Bush.

    Either way, the Obama administration has initiated a military action against an ephemeral group of dubious threat- he has implicitly allied himself with the Assad regime in process, and what is the left doing? They’re completely preoccupied with a goofy climate-change march which is a thinly veiled gr?ve g?n?rale against capitalism.

    Solid… fucking… genius.

    1. Less genius than that John Boehner and the GOP leadership are stupid, directionless and weak. They can’t beat some part-time lawyer who spends most of his time golfing. That’s not a sign that he’s brilliant…just that they’re fucking losers.

    2. I remember when my group of friends would try to convince people of our free-market ways. Seems a thousand centuries ago…

      We had just talked to a group, and we had convinced them. We were leaving, and this old man ran up crying. We went back there, and the Progressives had come and turned everyone stupid. They were in a pile. A pile of little morons.

      And I remember I cried. I wept like some grandmother! I wanted to tear my teeth out – I didn’t know what I wanted to do.

      And then it hit me! Like I was shot with a diamond … bullet right through my forehead! The genius of that! Perfect, complete, crystalline, pure!

  3. At this point we need something to soften the mood. When we come to collect.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtW6HW8jO_U

  4. “The Obama administration apparently believes it has the legal justification to attack ISIS under the resolution that authorized the war on terror in 2001. But that law quite specifically covers “those nations, organizations, or persons” that “planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.””

    That’s obviously a typo. Congress clearly meant for this authorization to apply here, because nobody expressly said that it did not.

    1. That’s obviously a typo.

      The fact that this argument has been used in political/legal discourse is sickening to me. It says something about what people think laws either are, or should be. (i.e. suggestions left to the discretion of whoever is in power)

    2. “You see, ‘al Queda’ is just a term for a larger group. We read this as, ‘anyone we don’t like at the moment.'”

  5. Obama builds unconstitutional wall to make things harder for business to move their addresses to reduce their tax burden.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/…..deals.html

    1. I, for one, cannot believe that our US Congress will stand for this!

      I will contact my representative immediately!

  6. Does IraqBodyCount.org cover Syria, or is it time for a new website?

  7. LEts bop them over the head with a Bible or something.

    http://www.Crypt-Anon.tk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.