The 53-page suit states that Smith has been deployed to the Kuwait headquarters of the Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve, which commands all forces in support of the war against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. The Army Captain is seeking a declaration that Obama's war against ISIS is illegal because Congress has not authorized it.
Under the 1973 War Powers Resolution, when the President introduces United States armed forces into hostilities, or into situations where hostilities are imminent, he must either get approval from Congress within sixty days to continue the operation, in the form of a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, or he must terminate the operation within the thirty days after the sixty-day period has expired.
Since Obama did not get authorization within the allotted time, Smith believes he is in violation of federal law. I would say it's worse than that since our Constitution, under Article II, Section 2, only allows for the president to actually be Commander-in-Chief and take control of America's military once Congress actually declares war, something they have not done since World War II.
According to Smith's filing, he is calling on the court to "issue a declaration that the War Powers Resolution requires the President to obtain a declaration of war or specific authorization from Congress within sixty days of the judgment, and that his failure to do so will require the disengagement, within thirty days, of all United States armed forces from the war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria."
"Captain Smith suffers legal injury because, to provide support for an illegal war, he must violate his oath to 'preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States'," the filing claims.
Additionally, the filing points out:
Finally, the Take Care clause required the President to publish a sustained legal justification, within the sixty-day period required by the War Powers Resolution, to enable Captain Smith to determine whether he can reconcile his military actions as an officer with his oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." In contrast to past practice, the President has failed to publish an opinion prepared by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel or the White House Counsel to justify the war against ISIS. He has instead left it to Administration spokespersons to provide ad hoc and ever-shifting legal justifications for a military campaign that is constantly changing its strategic objectives and escalating its use of force. This pattern of lawlessness is inconsistent with the President's obligation to "faithfully execute" the War Powers Resolution.Well, I'm glad to see one serviceman that is taking the oath seriously enough that he is willing to defy the usurper-in-chief's illegal actions. Congress sure isn't doing it even though they have threatened it.
If you recall, former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta justified the illegal actions of the administration in Libya because he had international consent and thumbed his nose at Rep. Jeff Sessions' Armed Services Committee about asking Congress for authorization when there was an international coalition.
Following Panetta's testimony, North Carolina Representative Walter Jones put forth a resolution that read, "Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution."
Indeed, no resolution was necessary as Obama should have been impeached because he was in violation of the Constitution.
A year and a half later, former Democrat congressman Dennis Kucinich echoed Jones' sentiments that Obama could face impeachment if he went around Congress and attacked Syria. And what happened? Nothing, absolutely nothing.
Due to the inaction of Congress to do their duty because of political expediency, we are facing troops on the ground again, without Constitutional authority in Iraq, and possibly troops on the ground in other countries without Congress declaring war. Because Congress has not done their duty and impeached Obama, it has only emboldened him to act even more lawlessly. Let's support Captain Smith in his endeavor.
http://freedomoutpost.com/us-army-captain-files-lawsuit-against-obama-over-unconstitutional-war-against-islamic-state/
2 comments:
Corporations don't have a commander-in-chief! The UNITED STATES federal government, Inc. is a corporation; hence, no commander-in-chief. Simple as that!
me thinks Nathan should take a look a proclamation 2039 and 2040 which CONGRESS did authorize via 50 USC App. 5(b), and 12 USC 95(a) and 95(b).
the commander-in-chief can do EXACTLY what he does with the authority he has had for many years. unfortunately, for Nathan, he like most of the other misguided americans, thinks the government is of the authority of the constitution ... and therefore has some duty under it ... we are in a STATE OF EMERGENCY and have been since the EBRA.
think back all you "constitutionalists" ... what happens during a STATE OF EMERGENCY ... what is suspended??
poor Nathan, me thinks he has simply found, yet another way, to break INTO prison ... or perhaps the brig.
Post a Comment