Brian4Liberty
09-23-2014, 12:20 PM
Going to war is a decision too important to be left to the President
By W. James Antle III - September 23, 2014
“War is too important to be left to the generals.” This is a paraphrase of a quote attributed to the French statesman Georges Clemenceau.
The Founding Fathers certainly thought war was too important to be left to the president.
“The constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it,” wrote James Madison, frequently called the Father of the Constitution. “It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.”
Despite the plain language of the Constitution, many today argue that presidential wars are perfectly permissible. In fact, they ridicule the very idea that anyone who isn’t a judge should be concerned about what is constitutional at all.
...
Should a lawmaker simply defer all constitutional questions to the judiciary?
...
First, members of Congress swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. They do not swear an oath to protect Supreme Court rulings or judicial precedent.
The same is true of the president and many other citizens who work for the government in far less prominent roles.
That means abiding by the language of the Constitution—by and large not a technical document—when its meaning is clear and uncontroversial.
It also means that elected officials must make their own independent constitutional judgments in the course of performing their duties.
Those judgments are not infallible, but neither are the judgments of the Supreme Court or the rest of the judicial branch.
...
Allowing the Constitution to be defined by judges alone short-circuits this process by allowing the federal government—or at least one branch of it—the final say in determining its own powers.
In practice, courts frequently impose constitutional interpretations that would be alien to the people who ratified the constitutional provisions in question. This allows the government to assume undelegated powers and ignores the primacy of the ratifying public.
This is not merely a technical matter. Judicial enforcement has failed to preserve a federal government limited to constitutionally enumerated powers.
For those who find the constitutional limits on federal power annoying, such as politicians, that is all to the good.
But for those who prefer lawful government, it is a serious problem.
...
More:
http://rare.us/story/going-to-war-is-a-decision-too-important-to-be-left-to-the-president/
By W. James Antle III - September 23, 2014
“War is too important to be left to the generals.” This is a paraphrase of a quote attributed to the French statesman Georges Clemenceau.
The Founding Fathers certainly thought war was too important to be left to the president.
“The constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it,” wrote James Madison, frequently called the Father of the Constitution. “It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.”
Despite the plain language of the Constitution, many today argue that presidential wars are perfectly permissible. In fact, they ridicule the very idea that anyone who isn’t a judge should be concerned about what is constitutional at all.
...
Should a lawmaker simply defer all constitutional questions to the judiciary?
...
First, members of Congress swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. They do not swear an oath to protect Supreme Court rulings or judicial precedent.
The same is true of the president and many other citizens who work for the government in far less prominent roles.
That means abiding by the language of the Constitution—by and large not a technical document—when its meaning is clear and uncontroversial.
It also means that elected officials must make their own independent constitutional judgments in the course of performing their duties.
Those judgments are not infallible, but neither are the judgments of the Supreme Court or the rest of the judicial branch.
...
Allowing the Constitution to be defined by judges alone short-circuits this process by allowing the federal government—or at least one branch of it—the final say in determining its own powers.
In practice, courts frequently impose constitutional interpretations that would be alien to the people who ratified the constitutional provisions in question. This allows the government to assume undelegated powers and ignores the primacy of the ratifying public.
This is not merely a technical matter. Judicial enforcement has failed to preserve a federal government limited to constitutionally enumerated powers.
For those who find the constitutional limits on federal power annoying, such as politicians, that is all to the good.
But for those who prefer lawful government, it is a serious problem.
...
More:
http://rare.us/story/going-to-war-is-a-decision-too-important-to-be-left-to-the-president/