Essay On War Powers

2436 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: War powers resolution ap gov essay

War powers refers to the powers exercised by Congress or the president during times of war or other crises affecting national security. Article 2, Section 2 of the US Constitution declares that the president is the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States. He may direct the military after an official declaration of war from Congress. There is a lot of disagreement and confusion about what exactly the president has the power to do under the Constitution. The purpose of this paper is to determine what war powers the constitution and Congress give the president, domestically and abroad during times of war, and what the scope of those powers is. The Constitution does not explicitly give the president additional powers during times of emergency, but many people think that the framers of the Constitution implied these powers because the executive branch can respond faster than the legislative in times of crisis. Abraham Lincoln used the claim of emergency powers when he suspended the writ of …show more content…

Chief Justice Stone wrote in the opinion that the agents had violated the law of war and were thus enemy combatants. Under the Articles of War, Congress authorized trials by military commission for enemy combatants, so the president was acting within his authority and the rights of the agents were not violated. In this case, the reason that the president was constitutionally able to order the agents to stand trial by military commission was because of the fact that they were enemy combatants. As long as the crime committed is a war crime, the president is authorized to do this. If the crime committed is not an act of war, it should be tried by jury in a civilian court. In addition, the rights of the 5th and 6th amendments apply to US citizens, but not necessarily to enemy combatants and non-citizens

Show More
Related

  • James S. Hirsch’s Book, Hurricane

    1825 Words  | 4 Pages

    The book raises the importance of, and questions, the writ of habeas corpus. Carter used a writ of habeas corpus to get a federal trial. Many question the legality of Carter going into federal jurisdiction, when his case should have been heard before the Supreme Court of New Jersey. It was a gamble, but the federal judge gave fair justice to Carter and Artis. The State of New Jersey appealed the case all the way to the United States Supreme Court, which upheld the District Court’s ruling.

    Read More

  • Ford V Wainwright Essay

    835 Words  | 2 Pages

    The case of Ford V. Wainwright is a Supreme court case of the United Stated argued in 1986. Alvin Bernard Ford is the plaintiff in this case, In 1974 he was convicted of murder in Florida and sentenced to death. In 1982 Ford began to show signs of a serious mental disorder. The Governor of Florida then appointed a panel of three psychiatrist to determine if Ford was component to understand the nature of the death penalty and the crime he had committed. All three psychiatrist disagreed on his exact diagnosis but agreed that he was sane and knew the nature of the death penalty. Ford’s attorney unsuccessfully sought a hearing in the state court for determination of his competency and then filed a hebeas corpus petition, which is a writ requiring a person to be brought before a judge or court especially for investigation of a restraint of the person’s liberty. The Florida courts denied his petition and signed a death warrant for Ford in 1984. Ford then sued Louie L. Wainwright, the defendant, who at the time of the case was the Secretary of the Florida Division of Correction.

    Read More

  • Lincoln's Suspension Of Habeas Corpus Analysis

    1451 Words  | 3 Pages

    Lincoln justified his action via the suspension clause, claiming that Congress was in recess and therefore could not fulfill its duty at the time. The Constitution itself specifically references habeas corpus and acknowledges that it can be suspended “in cases of rebellion,” however, as Chief Justice Roger Taney asserted in the ruling of Ex parte Merryman (1861), the writ of habeas corpus falls exclusively in the hands of Congress in Section 9 of Article 1“without the slightest reference to the executive branch.” Additionally, Article 6 provides all persons accused the “right to a speedy and public trial by impartial jury of the state.” Both provisions, Justice Taney stated, are in “language too clear to be misunderstood by anyone.” The ruling concluded by declaring that President Lincoln’s actions in suspending habeas corpus in Maryland were unconstitutional as he did so without proper congressional authorization. According to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Maryland, Lincoln had overstepped his appropriate executive authority as

    Read More

  • Schenck v. US

    735 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Supreme Court Justices were Edward D. White, Willis Van Devanter, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., James C. McReynolds, Louis D. Brandeis, William R. Day, John H. Clark, Mahlon Pitney, and Joseph McKenna at the time of this trial. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the United States to uphold the Espionage Act and the conviction of Schenck. Justice Holmes delivered the unanimous opinion of the court. In this Holmes sa...

    Read More

  • How Did The Founding Fathers To Create A Government In The United States?

    584 Words  | 2 Pages

    In both wars, “Presidents have often engaged in military operations without express Congressional consent. These operations include the Korean War, the Vietnam War,” (War Powers 2008). The result of the action to go to war in Vietnam led to the passing of the the War Powers Resolution in 1973. Since World War II, the presidency seemed to have control over Congress, which did change after the Vietnam War. The wars, though, were meant to protect the ideals of democracy in other parts of the world. However, to their claim, they say that, “since the Constitution was adopted there have been at least 125 instances in which the President has ordered the armed forces to take action or maintain positions abroad without obtaining prior congressional authorization, starting with the ‘undeclared war’ with France,” (Woods). However, they include several things that were very small, and not very large scale attacks, not even against other federal

    Read More

  • Terminiello v. Chicago

    573 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Supreme Court exercised its interpretation of the Constitution and found that a violation of the First Amendment was apparent and therefore, also a violation of the fourteenth Amendment showing that due process of the law was not given.

    Read More

  • United States v. Nixon

    367 Words  | 1 Pages

    " 2. The court said that it was difficult decide with the argument of executive privilege because there was no real claim to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets. 3. The court stated: "We conclude that when the ground for asserting privilege as to subpoenaed materials sought for use in criminal trial is based only on the generalized interest in confidentiality, it cannot prevail over the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of justice. The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial.

    Read More

  • The War Powers Act or The War Powers Resolution

    558 Words  | 2 Pages

    The War Powers Act or sometimes referred to as the War Powers Resolution is passed by congress. A group of Senators led by Jacov K. Javits of New York proposes fundamentally to change the constitutional relationship between President and Congress in the field of foreign affairs (Rostow). This act is an aftermath of the Vietnam War and it addresses a set of procedure for both President and Congress in the situation where the United States forces abroad could lead the United States into armed conflict. This act can be broken down into several parts. The first part asserts the policy behind the law, and the President’s power as a Commander in Chief is exercised only as a respond to declaration of war by Congress or in respond to national emergency; an attack upon the United States. The second part requires the President to discuss and consult with Congress before take an action in the U.S. Armed forces into hostilities and continue to discuss as long as the U.S. Armed forces remain in such condition. The third part explains that President should meet the requirement when he wants to introduce U.S Armed forces. The fourth part concerns more in congressional action and procedure. For instance, this part explains the procedure regarding legislation to withdraw the U.S. forces. The fifth part states the rules to be used in interpreting the War Power Act. At last, the sixth part explains separability provision in which if there is any part of the law is invalid, the rest of the law shall not considered invalid too.

    Read More

  • The Case of Marbury v. Madison

    989 Words  | 2 Pages

    The case involved several questions the Supreme Court had to answer. The first question was whether or not Marbury had a right to the commission. The Court decided that he did have the right because the appointment was issued while Adams was still in office and took effect as soon as it was signed. The next question was to determine if the law gave Marbury remedy. The Court found that the law did provide remedy for Marbury. Adams signed the appointment and Marshall sealed it thereby giving Marbury legal right to the office he was appointed to. Therefore, denying delivery of the appointment to him was a violation of his rights and the law provides him remedy. The third question was to determine whether the Supreme Court had the authority to review acts o...

    Read More

  • World War II as a Good War

    1889 Words  | 4 Pages

    ... indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.) rights. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the U.S. Government In both cases. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment05/

    Read More

  • Congress and The Presidency

    370 Words  | 1 Pages

    (Sell Lecture Notes, p.6) Congress shares responsibility with the president in declaring war, negotiating treaties with other countries and proving funds for soldiers and weapons. This is when conflicts come to head. The Vietnam War is a perfect example of this conflict, when the President waged war without a formal declaration of war from Congress. Because of this Congress then passed the War Powers Act in 1973. (Sell Lecture Notes, p.2) The Presidency has many responsibilities and powers.

    Read More

  • War Powers Resolution

    1613 Words  | 4 Pages

    The War Powers Resolution was the result of a consistent and ongoing power struggle between the President and Congress in the United States. The Constitution of the United States lays out the powers of the different branches of government. These branches are specifically designed to check each other to create a balance of power. In regards to foreign security affairs, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that the Congress has the power to declare war, maintain the army and navy, and control war funding. Under article II, section 2 the President is the Commander and Chief of the Army and Navy. The President can also veto a declaration of war made by the Congress which must be overturned by a 3/4ths vote by the Congress. The Presidential veto power was also used to create a hurdle for the Legislative branch in passing this policy. However, as this essay will establish, the Congress was able to pass the bill despite the opposition from the Executive branch. The War Powers Resolution is a controversial piece of legislation because it challenged the power of the President as the Commander and Chief of the army and navy. This challenge was perpetrated by Congress in order to check this power of the President and strengthen the significance of the right to declare war.

    Read More

  • The Government Does Have The Constitutional Power To Suspend The Constitution During A Time Of Crisis

    1412 Words  | 3 Pages

    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety," says Benjamin Franklin in Historical Review of 1759. Others tend to say just the opposite of what Ben Franklin quoted. With that being said, a key question comes up for discussion: Does the government have the Constitutional power to suspend the Constitution during a time of crisis? Certain documents were brought up for discussion that deal with certain articles from the Constitution and some acts/laws that the Congress passed to substantiate whether the government has certain powers. By using the U.S. Constitution, the Espionage Act, the Sedition Act, an executive order from President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and two federal Supreme Court cases, it will be proven that the government DOES have certain powers during a time of crisis.

    Read More

  • Lincoln the Tyrant

    2247 Words  | 5 Pages

    During the civil war, Lincoln blatantly disregarded the U.S. Constitution and adapted his own form of government. His first step was to suspend the writ of habeas corpus. With such rights thrown away, Lincoln arbitrarily imprisoned those who publicly disagreed with his principles.

    Read More

  • Abraham Lincoln's Abuse of Power

    741 Words  | 2 Pages

    The most blatant abuse of Lincoln's power was his suspension of habeas corpus. The suspension of this constitutional guarantee, by which a person could not be imprisoned indefinitely without being charges with some specific crime, around much opposition throughout the country. Although Lincoln himself made no concentrated efforts to suppress political oppositions, the repeal of habeas corpus enabled overzealous civil and military authorities to imprison thousands of people who were vocal in their opposition to the war against the South. During the war, in the case Ex parte Merryman, Chief Justice Taney ordered Lincoln to grant a writ of habeas corpus to a Southern agitator who had been arbitrarily jailed by military authorities in Maryland. Lincoln ignored the order. After the war, in the case Ex parte Milligan, the Supreme Court ruled that president could not suspend habeas corpus without the consent of Congress.

    Read More

More about Essay On War Powers

Open Document