Representative Murtha yesterday said that the President would be essentially forced to bow down to either public opinion or a Democratic House, and would have to bring the troops home:
WASHINGTON - Rep. John Murtha, a Vietnam veteran first elected in the anti-war fever of 1974, says American troops will be brought home from Iraq by 2007.
Either President Bush will bow to public opinion or Democrats will have won control of the House of Representatives and increased pressure on the White House, Murtha, D-Pa., said in an Associated Press interview Thursday.
Most likely, there will be a "tidal wave" that propels Democrats into the majority, said Murtha. He predicts Democrats will gain 40-50 seats -- well more than the 15 needed for the party to gain control.
[Source.]
That's all well and good, but can anyone else rather easily envision the administration challenging the Constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution of 1973?
Scary...
If I am reading it correctly, the War Powers Resolution of 1973 requires a Presidential report to Congress as to the events and objectives of the "war" within 48 hours of when it starts:
Section 4(a)(3). [I]n numbers which substantially enlarge United States Armed Forces equipped for combat already located in a foreign nation; the president shall submit within 48 hours to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth--
(A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces;
(B) the constitutional and legislative authority under which such introduction took place; and
(C) the estimated scope and duration of the hostilities or involvement.
Then Congress has sixty days from that report to either pass "specific statutory authorization" endorsing support for the action or compel the President to end the action:
Section 5(b). Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 4(a)(1), whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces,
The AUMF of 2002 serves as that specific statutory authorization, and also requires reports every sixty days:
The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 3 and the status of planning for efforts that are expected to be required after such actions are completed, including those actions described in section 7 of the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338).
Now the scary part. Section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution does allow Congress to compel the President to end the war effort on the basis of a concurrent resolution:
Notwithstanding subsection (b), at any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.
BUT, the AUMF does not reserve that power for Congress.
Pretty much every President since 1973 has balked at the constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution on the grounds that the President has the sole plenary power to "repel attacks" against the United States, but its constitutionality has never been tested, because the President and Congress have generally been in accord as to where and when our armed forces should be fighting.
If Democrats take the House and/or Senate, and compel the President to end the war (or part of the war) based on §5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, its not difficult to imagine the Attorney General arguing that the resolution is unconstitutional, and that the AUMF is the law of the land.
Follow it a little further -- if the case got to the Supreme Court, its not too much of a stretch to see the Court agreeing with the White House. And then what do we have?
Unending war, and no way to stop it until at least January of 2009.
Is it strange if things like this keep me up at night?