Article

2011-06-18 Africa North

Top Lawyers Lost to Obama in Libya War Policy Debate

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by 2011-06-18 09:21|| || Front Page|| [5 views ] Top

#1 Obumble really wants to set himself up as a king, doesn't he?

Posted by DarthVader 2011-06-18 10:19|| 2011-06-18 10:19|| Front Page Top

#2 Trying HARD to be recognised as ALREADY King.
As in the Mideast way.

Posted by Redneck Jim 2011-06-18 10:34|| 2011-06-18 10:34|| Front Page Top

#3 I am not sure whether I agree or disagree with the foray into Libya. I do believe he needs to present the case to Congress and the people for authorization. Most likely it would be approved. But for some reason (to try and evade 'ownership'?) he does not want to make his case. Precedent is being set that gives way too much power to the Executive - again! We may all (left, right & middle) come to regret it, if not in this Administration then in some future one.

Posted by Glenmore 2011-06-18 10:47|| 2011-06-18 10:47|| Front Page Top

#4 Dropping bombs certainly seems to be 'hostile', unless you buy Joseph Heller's idea that it is just a 'special service'...

There is an interesting thought. If you could outsource the work in Libya to a private firm, it just becomes another government contract without all that sticky War Powers Act stuff. Works for piracy, too!

Posted by SteveS 2011-06-18 11:47|| 2011-06-18 11:47|| Front Page Top

#5 Qadaffi is a pissant psycho who has already killed a bunch of Americans. As a rule of thumb, if you can take out someone like him, go for it. Even if whoever replaces him isn't particularly friendly, there is a lot more to work with if they are sane.

Posted by Anonymoose 2011-06-18 12:28|| 2011-06-18 12:28|| Front Page Top

#6 Yes, 'moose. It's really smart to destroy the only third world strong man who gave WMD.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2011-06-18 12:32|| 2011-06-18 12:32|| Front Page Top

#7 This entire thing is madness. The War Powers Act is blatantly unconstitutional. And whe I appreciate the tactic of beating this president over the head with whatever stick is handy, the better option for Republicans would be to use this opportunity to repeal the Act.

Posted by Iblis 2011-06-18 13:06|| 2011-06-18 13:06|| Front Page Top

#8 That's a silly statement: the OLC works for the President. They are the President's in-house counsel. They don't run the White House, they advise the White House.

The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) works for the President in the sense that everyone in the Executive Branch works for the President. But the OLC would more fairly be described as the Executive Branch's (EB) attorney and the Office of Which House Counsel (WHC) as exclusively the President's attorney. The head of the OLC is subject to confirmation by the Senate, the WHC is not. The work product of the WHC may be attorney client privileged and the OLC not.

The OLC issues written opinions that are treated by the Executive branch as definitive until overturned by actual courts. One of the reasons the OLC was created was that prior to it each department in the EB was operating under its own opinion of the law and this led to departments holding conflicting interpretations of a law. The OLC was set up to issue definitive legal opinions to be adhered to consistently across departments. Its opinions have no legal force, but administratively the define the EB interpretation of law until a court ruling is issued. It is unusual for the opinion of the OLC to be overruled. I believe Comrade Obamao is the first to do so since FDR, but I can't find backup.

The fair way to characterize the relationships is that the EB goes to the OLC to find out what the law is prior to court ruling. The OLC may get input some legal, some political, from anyone in the EB including the WHC. And it then renders an opinion for the EB. The President goes to the WHC tells him what he wants to do and tells the WHC to find legal justification for doing it.

Notable AAGs for OLC include Nicholas Katxenbach, William Rhenquist, Antonin Scalia and Ted Olson. WHC have included Ted Sorensen, John Ehrlichman, John Dean, and Harriet Miers.

This is a big deal inside the beltway and will not help Obamao and will provide coverage to those of both parties who want to undermine the banana in Libya.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2011-06-18 13:53|| 2011-06-18 13:53|| Front Page Top

#9 Nimble, thank you very much for that important clarification. I had conflated the OLC and the White House office.

Once again, Rantburg University to the rescue!

Posted by Steve White 2011-06-18 15:06|| 2011-06-18 15:06|| Front Page Top

#10 Granted Gadaffy is an evil mideast dictator with American blood on his hands. If his end came, no one would shed a tear. There are still other evil mideast dictators as bad.

Obama doesn't need the War Powers Resolution? Really? He doesn't need Congress? Really? He doesn't need the Constitution? Really? He only needs an U.N. Security Council resolution where some countries abstained from voting; others opposed the no-fly zone. I also recall Sec. Gates had reservations about Libya. It seems Mr. Obama is on thin ice. His actions are the stuff of dictators. George Bush had the approval of Congress and an U.N. resolution to go into Afghanistan and Iraq.

Posted by JohnQC 2011-06-18 15:08|| 2011-06-18 15:08|| Front Page Top

#11 I'll shed a tear for American foreign policy. see #6. We have stabbed every ally and non-enemy in the back and rewarded every enemy.What a fool obumble is.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2011-06-18 15:31|| 2011-06-18 15:31|| Front Page Top

#12 Not a fool, NS. An ideologue with no reality check. Much more damaging.

Posted by lotp 2011-06-18 15:35|| 2011-06-18 15:35|| Front Page Top

#13 Dropping bombs certainly seems to be 'hostile', unless you buy Joseph Heller's idea that it is just a 'special service'...

There is an interesting thought. If you could outsource the work in Libya to a private firm, it just becomes another government contract without all that sticky War Powers Act stuff. Works for piracy, too!

Milo Minderbinders grandson Major Major Milo Minderbinder IX can work a deal with either side. The Minderbinder clan got a world exclusive manufacturing rights on large pointy sprockets, traded their secret recipe for chocolate covered cotton for it.

Posted by Zombie Hillary Lover 2011-06-18 17:38|| 2011-06-18 17:38|| Front Page Top

#14 He doesn't need the Constitution?

Technically he's within the Constitution. The Legislative branch, given the international security situation since WWII, has granted the Executive branch a large standing military. The Founding Fathers never anticipated such a thing except during time of war. By keeping tight hold on the purse strings the history of the country shows that it funded just enough, and sometimes, not enough of a standing force, to deal with problems on the frontier and commerce issues at sea. It was understood from the beginning that to deal with such emergencies, the government didn't have time to convene Congress in order to get the troops or sailors to the point of conflict for what would be today considered a 'police action'. To fund a large forces and operations, the Executive has had to traditionally (pre-WWII) request the resources first from Congress who would either provide what was requested or not but usually with a 'use by date' attached.

The whole War Powers Act was an attempt at a Legislative veto created in the post-Vietnam era when the Donks wanted to hobble the Executive but not be placed in a situation of defunding the entire defense establishment in face of the reality of the Soviet el al threats in the world.

It is an unresolved issue in which the mechanisms of the Constitution say if you don't want him to be able to play with the toys, you have to take the funding away from him. That doesn't work well in a world where you're the big boy upon which everyone else expects you to have the means to play policeman or cowboy. That issue is also compounded by treaties approved by the Senate which obligate the country in international organizations.

Congress' power resides in its authority under Article I, Section 8, to control the purse strings, to approve the size of the military forces, and approve/disapprove the appointment of officers. If Congress does not act in these areas and just rubber stamps what the Executive wants, its Congress' problem when it comes to these type of military actions.

Posted by Procopius2k 2011-06-18 17:39|| 2011-06-18 17:39|| Front Page Top

#15 The whole War Powers Act was an attempt at a Legislative veto created in the post-Vietnam era when the Donks wanted to hobble the Executive but not be placed in a situation of defunding the entire defense establishment in face of the reality of the Soviet el al threats in the world.

for that reason alone, the Reps should push this down Obama's and the Donks' throats: "Do you support this ONLY when a Rep is the Executive"? - if so, then you are a partisan hack. Or ....is it unconstitutional, and available to President Perry in 2012 without congressional bitching?

Your response in 4...3...2..

Posted by Frank G 2011-06-18 18:43|| 2011-06-18 18:43|| Front Page Top

#16 Heh Frank -- I caught that President Perry thingy....

Posted by Sherry 2011-06-18 21:38|| 2011-06-18 21:38|| Front Page Top

#17 Frank: I understand that the Dems' whole "point" is that _this_ intervention is legal because it has the UN seal of approval, and that that makes anything any subservient-to-UN US institutions, like Congress or the Supremes, besides the point.

Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2011-06-18 22:44|| 2011-06-18 22:44|| Front Page Top

23:47 Zebulon Thranter9685
22:44 Thing From Snowy Mountain
22:09 Pappy
21:38 Sherry
20:25 phil_b
20:10 Zhang Fei
19:58 phil_b
18:52 Frank G
18:50 Frank G
18:50 phil_b
18:47 Frank G
18:43 Frank G
18:37 Frank G
18:34 Dale
18:25 Dale
18:22 SteveS
18:13 Dale
18:06 Dale
18:01 Zombie Hillary Lover
17:39 Procopius2k
17:38 Zombie Hillary Lover
17:32 Zombie Hillary Lover
17:11 OldSpook
16:58 Varmint Clolumble9732