Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
In 2011 Obama initiated the US intervention in Libya. He did not follow the requirements of the War Powers Resolution, 1973, and his actions could be considered not constitutional. However, some critics claim that Obama’s behavior might be justified. I believe that according to the War Powers Resolution statement of a 60-day limit to use the military forces in a foreign country without congressional authority, Obama’s actions did not comply with the law.
First, even though there are various views on the role of Congress and a president in war declaration, the principle of the 60-day (under some circumstances 90-day) limit is determined clearly. After all, Obama did not want Congress’s approval when the limit of 60 days run out (Boaz, 2011). According to Goldsmith, the opponent, the long-continued practice of using force by a president without congressional approval was not met with impeachments or refusal to finance (2011). However, the executive branch explained the grounds for many cases of unauthorized military action via public legal opinions (Goldsmith, 2011). Therefore, before military action in Libya approached the limit of 60 days (American Foreign Relations, 2021), Obama’s actions were constitutional. But after it without authorization from Congress and public legal explanations, the military strikes appeared illegal.
Additionally, if there were plenty of such violations, they could not be considered valid. Boaz refers to Obama’s words that if a president unilaterally initiates an armed attack in a situation that does not mean preventing an actual threat to the nation, his actions are not constitutional (2011). But the president’s decision to intervene in Libya was not a case of imminent danger. Moreover, even Goldsmith tends to agree that the intervention did not risk the American people’s lives or their property (2011). The national security justification of the conflict was not strongly identified because the war in a Muslim country is not associated with American goals in foreign policy.
All things considered, the actions in Libya were not explained to the people, and there were no consultations with Congress. The scope of the president’s power and congressional authority is not determined evidently, but still, people could rely upon certain positions. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 acknowledges that a president can use military force within 60 (or 90) days, and the scope of danger from Libya is a questionable matter.
References
American Foreign Relations, (2021). Judiciary power and practice – the war powers resolution.American Foreign Relations. Web.
Boaz, D. (2011). President Obama’s illegal war.CATO Institute. Web.
Goldsmith, J. (2011). War power. The president’s campaign against Libya is constitutional.Slate. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.