Is President Obama About to Break the Law?
EmailFrom the beginning of the U.S. military intervention in Libya, the Obama administration has cited the 1973 War Powers Act as the legal basis of its ability to conduct military activities for 60 days without first seeking a declaration of war from Congress.
The military intervention started on March 19; Congress was notified on March 21.
Those 60 days expire tomorrow.
Last week, Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that President Obama “has been mindful of the provisions of the War Powers Resolution and has acted in a manner consistent with them. He will continue to do so.”
Steinberg said the administration is “mindful of the passage of time including the end of the two-month period, we are in the process of reviewing our role, and the president will be making decisions going forward in terms of what he sees as appropriate for us to do."
What is President Obama -– a former lecturer in constitutional law — going to do? White House officials refused to say.
And the chorus of criticism -– from the right and left — is rising.
On Wednesday six Republican senators — John Cornyn of Texas, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Jim DeMint of South Carolina, Mike Lee of Utah, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Rand Paul of Kentucky – wrote to the president, saying the military intervention "was taken without regard to or compliance with the requirement of section 2(c) of the War Powers Resolution that the United States Armed Forces only be introduced into hostilities or situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances ‘pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.’
“As recently as last week your Administration indicated use of the United States Armed Forces will continue indefinitely,” the GOP senators wrote. “Therefore, we are writing to ask whether you intend to comply with the requirements of the War Powers Resolution. We await your response.”
Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., told CNN the operation was “bring(ing) democracy to Libya while shredding the Constitution of the United States….He cannot continue what he’s doing in Libya without congressional authorization. And when a president defiantly violates the law that really undercuts our effort to urge other countries to have the rule of law.”
Biden Reflects on Grief, Suicidal Thoughts 
Is Congress Sounding Dumber?
understand that Obama, and his fellow travelers, had no problem with the POLICIES of Bush/Cheney. It was simply who was in charge. Now that Obama is in control they have accelerated the war-making, corruption, and police state of Bush/Cheney:
-starting new illegal wars
-keeping Gitmo
-keeping, and strengthening, “patriot” acts
-anti-civilrights rules
-government snooping, warrantless wiretaps, tracking citizens, etc
-PPPs, crony contracts, waivers of regulations for “friendly” companies, corruption, etc
Interestingly the only people that Obama’s administration has civil rights concerns over are either foreign terrorists or illegal aliens.
Some “change”.
Posted by: Al | May 19, 2011, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm
Behold the Amazing Obama as he turns chickenhawks into doves!
Seriously though this whole business of how we send combat troops overseas all the time without any notification of Congress is an ongoing travesty with regard to the Constitution. If we maintain that we have a written constitution, we really ought to abide by it. The problem for the executives of war declarations being required in the legislative branch is not new, but with petty GOP chickenhawks acting like doves in order to score political points against the President, there may be an opportunity for constitutionally re-orienting war powers to where they belong – in the legislative branch.
Posted by: Lyle Delp | May 19, 2011, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm
This shouldn’t be that hard for Obama if he wants to continue: Just ask Congress for the approval (and let the decision to continue or stop lie with lawmakers), as required by law. Done. There is no basis for any, “Well, it’s not that simple…” nonsense. Yes it is. It’s the law. Period. And this guy’s a scholar of law?
Posted by: James Palen | May 19, 2011, 7:45 pm 7:45 pm
“Days, not weeks…”
– Barack Hussein Obama, at the start of US military actions in Libya.
Posted by: Patrick Dorwin | May 19, 2011, 7:55 pm 7:55 pm
Why do you think so many people are backing Ron Paul?
Posted by: YES_WE_CAN | May 19, 2011, 8:11 pm 8:11 pm
Please define about.
Posted by: Cape Codder in the Desert | May 19, 2011, 8:47 pm 8:47 pm
“Is President Obama About to Break the Law?”
A REAL reporter would have added “again.” This so called “constitutional scholar” has continually ignored the constitution. Purposefully.
Posted by: wheresmymoney | May 19, 2011, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm
Posted by: JamePadgett | May 19, 2011 8:56:08 PM
The real reason Congress doesn’t object to what he is doing is they are afraid of being called racist.
Posted by: wheresmymoney | May 19, 2011, 9:00 pm 9:00 pm
He hasn’t respected the law so far, why would this be any different?
Posted by: ravenhair49 | May 19, 2011, 9:33 pm 9:33 pm
Typical leftist aristocrat. Laws are for the little people.
Posted by: John | May 19, 2011, 9:52 pm 9:52 pm
journalists have become Obama’s court jesters
Posted by: mablanco | May 19, 2011, 9:58 pm 9:58 pm
journalists have become Obama’s court jesters
++++++++++++++++++
Right-wingers who want their news to consist of exclusively what they want to hear watch Fox.
Posted by: Skip | May 19, 2011, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm
“Right-wingers who want their news to consist of exclusively what they want to hear watch Fox.”
Let us know when they get fooled like NPR.
Posted by: Acorn | May 19, 2011, 10:28 pm 10:28 pm
Stay tuned for our next staged interview with Sarah Palin
Posted by: The Factor | May 19, 2011, 10:36 pm 10:36 pm
In Obama’s world laws are for other people, not an emperor such as himself.
Please! Obama is a disaster – especially after throwing Israel under the bus today.
Posted by: Teddy | May 19, 2011, 10:38 pm 10:38 pm
Democrats often express dissenting opinions on the show….you just don’t always hear them.
Posted by: The O'Reilly Button | May 19, 2011, 10:47 pm 10:47 pm
Many people say how stupid obama is. He’s not stupid, he just doesn’t have American values, and what he does and doesn’t do for America is his plan against it…its not that he doesn’t know what he’s doing…he’s doing it to ruin our republic – to instill the marix/socialist agenda.
Posted by: Vic | May 19, 2011, 10:51 pm 10:51 pm
Well said, Al. Obama is more a war monger than Bush/Cheney – and the media says “nothing”. Amazing, isn’t it? As a matter of fact, Obama does more against the country than Bush/Cheney ever did – and the media does nothing… sickening, isn’t it?
Posted by: Vic | May 19, 2011, 10:55 pm 10:55 pm
Due to the number of media positions being vacated by those running for Republican nominations Fox is now hiring.
Posted by: personel department | May 19, 2011, 11:24 pm 11:24 pm
So what else is new with this imposter ??
Posted by: Raymond | May 19, 2011, 11:27 pm 11:27 pm
It is almost comical that those complaining here have forgotten the lies by the Bush administration that got us suckered into the Iraq War, resulting in over a 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths.
By comparison, Obama and other country’s leaders followed a U.N. sanction to prevent civilian massacres by using air power in Libya.
Think about it.
Posted by: Lydia | May 20, 2011, 12:01 am 12:01 am
Obama is a war criminal. Impeach him now and put a stop to this ghetto gangsta gov’ment thuggocracy.
Posted by: LibsAreTerrorists | May 20, 2011, 12:24 am 12:24 am
So, what are the Constitutional remedies if Obama ignores Congress and fails to comply with the War Powers Act?
Posted by: wild biker | May 20, 2011, 12:33 am 12:33 am
Let us know when they get fooled like NPR
++++++++++++++++++++
Fox only has to keep up the appearance of being balanced for marketing purposes, NPR has an actual policy.
Posted by: Skip | May 20, 2011, 12:57 am 12:57 am
especially after throwing Israel under the bus today
++++++++++++++++++++
From ABC:
“Mr. Obama also condemned Arab “efforts to delegitimize Israel” including a planned September vote at the United Nations to “isolate” the Jewish state”
Now throwing under the proverbial bus may be a matter of opinion but considering what’s at stake here claiming so may be borderline whining.
Posted by: Skip | May 20, 2011, 1:29 am 1:29 am
he’s doing it to ruin our republic – to instill the marix/socialist agenda
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Brought to you by the Fear department of the Party of Fear and Greed.
Posted by: Skip | May 20, 2011, 1:34 am 1:34 am
“So, what are the Constitutional remedies if Obama ignores Congress and fails to comply with the War Powers Act?” Impeachment and removal from office.
Posted by: Publius | May 20, 2011, 2:07 am 2:07 am
Israel is oppressing an indigenousness people similar to what the USA did to the American Indian. They make a treaty with geographical borders then send in settlers onto land that they do not own, then when the indigenousness people respond they send in their military to stump out the protest. Settlements grow and the process continues. Palestinians have been evicted from homes and land that go back generations. Americans who have not been in Israel and not seen the city of Hebron, or the illegally placed wall or been subjected to incredibly arrogant, degrading and offensive treatment by the Israel military need to investigate and learn what is happening beyond the PR spins of our Jewish denominated media outlets. Israel has acted criminally toward the indigenous people of Palestine.
I am no OBama lover, but I applaud him for actually holding Israel to an agreement (1967) that they have tried to ignore existed.
Posted by: Joe | May 20, 2011, 3:24 am 3:24 am
yes
Posted by: deadwrestler | May 20, 2011, 5:18 am 5:18 am
This has been an illegal act of war from the beginning.
Posted by: Pablo | May 20, 2011, 7:02 am 7:02 am
Joe you are wrong to applaud Obama and you are wrong about the settlements.
There was a war in 1967.
It was started by the Arabs.
Israel won.
They get the land.
There are consequences in life.
The Palestinians don’t get a Do Over.
Posted by: Noz | May 20, 2011, 7:43 am 7:43 am
It is WAYYYY past time to remind the Pretender-In-Chief that he IS NOT a King and CAN NOT do as he pleases…He is a PUBLIC SERVANT elected to do the will of WE THE PEOPLE !!! If he should choose to ignore that fact, then Congress is REQUIRED to move forward with all necessary measures, including impeachment if necessary, in order to maintain a balance of powers under OUR CONSTITUTION!
Posted by: Escapee1 | May 20, 2011, 7:47 am 7:47 am
Oh my gosh…. the GOP that spent decades crafting the theory of the Unitary Executive…. is scandalized by the application of their own theories!
It’s always that way with the GOP agenda.
They promise their little innovations are urgently necessary, utterly patriotic, and wonderful… They ruthlessly hammer their views down the throats of the public.
And then, when we actually have to live with the predicted outcomes of their policies… they find them unreasonable. (until, of course, they get re-elected).
Out of control Wall Street and economic collapse? They created it.
Unitary executive? Created it.
War? They started it.
Stagnant wages? They wanted it.
Outsourcing and high unemployment? They promised it.
Dismantle public education? It’s on their platform.
Bankrupt the Big Government? They have been trying to “starve the beast” for years.
Unregulated, high profit, skyrocketing energy industry? They promised it would be the best thing for America.
Structurally high unemployment? The GOP economist believe it is a good thing, because it weakens the position of labor.
This is all part of the public record and anyone can find it…. if they bother to read history.
And, guess what, they aim to “Fix” Medicare and Social Security next!
And, after they are dismantled and when old people are dying in the streets! They are going to pretend they are outraged, try to blame it on the Democrats.
Why do you think they go on the offensive when you “Blame Bush”?
Because they know what will happen if people put 2 and 2 together.
Posted by: Blip | May 20, 2011, 7:52 am 7:52 am
“Let us know when they get fooled like NPR. ”
That’s the difference: occasionally, NPR reporters get fooled by con artists.
At FOX, the “journalists” ARE the con artists.
Posted by: Blip | May 20, 2011, 7:54 am 7:54 am
Careful, asking that Obama obey any law that the rest of us must follow can get you labeled a R-A-C-I-S-T . . . . .
Posted by: Dennis (an iraq vet) | May 20, 2011, 7:55 am 7:55 am
Second comment:
Why get upset, he does whatever he wants and the lapdog media covers for him.
meanwhile
unemployment is still 9%
Deficit is 14 trillion
gas is 4.00 a gallon
food prices rising.
(in case anyone forgot)
Posted by: Dennis (an iraq vet) | May 20, 2011, 7:57 am 7:57 am
lydia wrote:”By comparison, Obama and other country’s leaders followed a U.N. sanction to prevent civilian massacres by using air power in Libya.
Think about it.”
.
How many U.N. resolutions were passed regarding Iraq? How many times did Congress provide authorization to enforce those resolutions? Who got suckered here?
Posted by: gk | May 20, 2011, 8:08 am 8:08 am
“understand that Obama, and his fellow travelers, had no problem with the POLICIES of Bush/Cheney. It was simply who was in charge.”
Sadly Al, I think you’re EXACTLY right.
Posted by: dave | May 20, 2011, 8:20 am 8:20 am
“What is President Obama -– a former lecturer in constitutional law — going to do?”
Has there ever been a more thoroughly debunked attribute about a President than Obama being some sort of expert in Constitutional Law since he was once a lecturer? This man knows less about the Constitution than a high school honors student. Unbelievable really.
Posted by: J.R. | May 20, 2011, 8:27 am 8:27 am
J.R. wrote:”This man knows less about the Constitution than a high school honors student.”
.
That’s giving him way too much credit. Try middle school or maybe even elementary student.
Posted by: gk | May 20, 2011, 8:33 am 8:33 am
Blip,you seem to know so much about Fox and NPR-did you watch both yesterday? Have you found out wholesale price of gasoline yet?
Posted by: Nephron | May 20, 2011, 8:37 am 8:37 am
There’s a disconnect with the media’s thinking that knowing the US Constitution (wildly assuming for the moment that Obama does) and abiding by it are the same. Does anyone think that a bank robber doesn’t realize he’s breaking the law? The media give Obama so much benefit of the doubt it’s in-credible.
Posted by: Larry | May 20, 2011, 10:06 am 10:06 am
You should actually read the War Powers Resolution. It allows for 90 days total, not 60. There are 30 additional days allowed for withdrawal. That said, presidents of both parties have typically viewed the WPR as an unconstitutional limit on the powers given to the Executive Branch in the Constitution. Oh, and by the way, there’s actually precedent for military engagements beyond 60 days: Kosovo went for 78 without an AUMF.
Posted by: Travis | May 20, 2011, 10:06 am 10:06 am
His supporters don’t care about the War Powers Act or anything else. They are very happy with our new king.
Posted by: JR | May 20, 2011, 10:26 am 10:26 am
Who expects outrage ? The Senate is on record just a few weeks ago rejecting the idea that the President had to go to Congress to wage war like that in Libya …
Back in 2007, Senator Obama told the Boston Globe “the president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the (U.S.) nation.”
Paul said he wanted the Senate to endorse Obama’s past words and thus establish that the president had overreached in authorizing the U.S. action in Libya last month without first obtaining Congress’ approval.
The Senate rejected pre-Nobel-Obama’s view by 90-10
Posted by: John Q Public | May 20, 2011, 12:46 pm 12:46 pm
well them will he go to jail for breaking the law?
Posted by: bransbe | May 20, 2011, 2:13 pm 2:13 pm
Obamalinsky is like a moth to a flame and eventually will get burned.
Posted by: ALMACK | May 20, 2011, 4:05 pm 4:05 pm
I have watched over the past 40 years and both parties are guilty of ignoring the constitution. This is what we have become because of it. No one ever mentions how they robbed the social security funds that were secure to take care of those to retirement until they started dipping into it and putting IOU’s in place of the money. Now they are going to do it to retirement funds. The States have also been stealing out of one fund or another to do what ever special project they thought would be nice. The real problem is we need to replace all the older ones in office for so long as they are the problem. We have had many a good person voted into office over the years just to have the old establishment to shut them down.I just don’t get why the American people don’t realize whats been happening for so long. I guess it is because they like to put the fighting between the parties we the people not the politicians. Lets face it they all give us a pretty speech before they take office and then they do any damn thing they want. We love to be manipulated I guess.
Posted by: Richard | May 20, 2011, 4:51 pm 4:51 pm
What US forces we have in action in Libya are there under the Auspices of NATO. (North Atlantic TREATY Organization). If I remember correctly, Solemnization of a treaty between the United States and any other organization requires, “the advice and consent of the Senate”. So how can it be illegal for the President of the United States to fulfill a treaty Obligation imposed on him by precedent and approved by the Senate?
Posted by: GBM | May 20, 2011, 5:22 pm 5:22 pm
Netanyahu: No going back to ’67 lines
===
Now what will our Greatest Smartest Clueless Leader do, excuse, say?
Posted by: Duh | May 20, 2011, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm
For duh well how about Obama is illegally waging war on a nation who did not attack us. Nato north atlantic treaty org where does Libya fit into th North Atlantic. Also both parties are guilty of involving us in wars by pretending the presidents are now kings. Also isn’t it ironic that all the major wars that were undeclared from Korea to Libya with the exception of BUSH 1 & 2 were all wait for it Democrats.
Posted by: Jkiser | May 20, 2011, 8:28 pm 8:28 pm
“fulfill a treaty Obligation”
Hahahahaha!!!
Which NATO member got attacked, GBM? Or are you admitting we’re going to war for European oil???
No (more) blood for oil.
Posted by: dave | May 21, 2011, 7:38 am 7:38 am
Obama doesn’t believe in rules…..”Do as I say, not as I do!”…
Posted by: chukkal | May 21, 2011, 9:52 pm 9:52 pm
What do you mean, “about to break the law”? He’s done nothing BUT break the law since he was elected!
Posted by: BKW | May 22, 2011, 1:50 am 1:50 am
The good folks commenting on this site and/or story should keep in mind that Obama is acting as a faux-emperor/president of the global corporate/financial/militarist Empire which now controls our former country (as well as U.K. Israel, et al) by hiding behind the facade of the empire’s bought and owned TWO-Party modernized Nazi-like ‘Vichy” sham of faux-democratic government, and equally “Vichy” corporatist (fascist) media (which provides propaganda lies to Americans of both the left and the right).
As such faux-emperor/president it is certainly true that Obama does not represent the interests of the general population of honest, average, middle/working-class Americans in the subsumed US territory any more than all of the previous faux-emperor/presidents; Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II have helped this disguised Empire capture our country.
Therefore, it is entirely rational and reasonable, in line with the majority of comments, that any and all of these political pawns posing as faux-emperor/presidents were not legal presidents of our fading democratic country — and that all posters who have voiced such valid criticism and disgust with Obama should work toward insuring that no further faux-emperor/presidents of the disguised global EMPIRE that now IS the US should be allowed to take office for the EMPIRE.
I applaud any effort to expose, educate, expunge, and excise any candidates for the office of President of the US who are actually pawns of the hidden global Empire. Only through serious and principled efforts can we recover our country from the clutches of this disguised global Empire. And all good Americans should avoid voting for any such phonies and pawns of Empire by avoiding any voting for any Empire endorsed, Empire captured, Empire funded, and Empire disguised candidate of either phony political party —- by requiring any candidate for president of our country to address the issue of where they stand on the global Empire which is in the process of fully taking over our country. And ANY candidate who pretends not to be able to address the issue of the EMPIRE is clearly a phony stooge and candidate of this global Empire — who should never be voted for by any true American who loves their democratic Republic and hates the type of Empire that oppressed; politically, economically, and militarily our forefathers in the colonies prior to 1776.
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
Liberty & democracy over violent empire — New America People’s Party 2012
Posted by: Alan MacDonald | May 24, 2011, 10:55 am 10:55 am