Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Warner on Sen Floor saying Levin amendm. is prob. UNconstitutional

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:11 PM
Original message
Warner on Sen Floor saying Levin amendm. is prob. UNconstitutional



Warner on Sen Floor saying Levin amendm. is prob. UNconstitutional
cause it dictates to the Pres a strategy for war (which belongs to the Exec Branch).


Oh oh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:12 PM
Response to Original message
1. That's been the talking point for a while now. I smell BS,
but I'm not Constitutional wonky enough to say for certain.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
2. shove it up their asses and cut the funding for everyfuckingthing.
:hippie:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
14. I was thinking shove it up their asses and cut the funding
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. Yeah, the 1st named branch of government must tippy-toe around with care not to steps on
Edited on Mon Jul-16-07 04:45 PM by indepat
junior's executive toes all the while the Congress's powers are being almost totally usurped.

Edit: spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Well, let's get a judgement on that from the DOJ? Errr, um, SCOTUS
Yeah, lets pass the amendment and then send it to the SCROT (Supreme Court Republicans On Task) for a fair and balanced hearing. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. I think that's the set-up exactly. Same with Bush ordering Miers not to testify. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. "SCROT" ...
I love it!

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
5. Nope; this law school graduate thinks that Warner is full of hot air.
There is a long line of Supreme Court cases (case precedent, otherwise known as 'the law') backing Congressional ability to tie funding to requirements.

By contrast, the High Court has not stated that the President's power, as Commander-in-Chief is unlimited, and has, in reality, only given him discretion as to initial placement of troops, daily execution of policy, etc.

My money's on Levin and Team this battle (if they have the spine to carry things out).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. June 30, 1970 - Church-Cooper amendment
<snip>

The amendment stipulated that the administration could not spend funds for soldiers, combat assistance, advisers, or bombing operations in Cambodia. Nixon had already withdrawn U.S. troops from that country, but he wanted the option to send them back if he felt it would help win the war in adjacent Vietnam. The House, not wanting to limit the commander in chief's options too much, endorsed a weaker version that limited the restrictions to ground troops. The Senate agreed, and the compromise version was attached to a supplemental aid bill that passed both the House and Senate. It was sent to the president in late December, and he signed it in January 1971, even though it tied his hands. "The passage of the Church-Cooper amendment marked the first successful use of congressional budgetary authority to limit the war," Zelizer says.

<snip>

In 1972, the Senate passed an amendment to foreign-aid legislation that would end funding for all U.S. military operations in Southeast Asia except for withdrawal (subject to the release of all prisoners of war). Senate passage marked the first time that either chamber had approved a total cutoff of funds for continuing the war.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070506/14vie...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. ? O.K. That backs my contention that they may withhold funding.
The High Court has consistently backed up this Congressional power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damntexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. The Constitution gives the prez power as commander in chief, but does not mention war.
Congress is given the power with regard to war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Yep (n/t).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TwilightGardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
6. There's an article in the Constitution that says Congress has the
power to make rules regarding land and sea forces--Durbin used it, Webb and Hagel used it last week to shoot down that talking point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
8. Well technically we aren't at "war" as defined by the constitution...
Congress never formally declared war on Iraq...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
churchofreality Donating Member (545 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
9. Isn't congress supposed to declare war?
How did we get to this point? We didn't declared war in Vietnam and we didn't in Iraq. Congress, I got a fucking good idea, next time the president asks for a war resolution, say fuck you, and if there is a real occasion to defend the USA, declare war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
10. Lying in a state of the union speech and causing a war is prolly
unconstitutional too but Warner never give a damn then. Warner helped Bush lie us into Traq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:21 PM
Response to Original message
12. Well then I guess he'll have to stay there until the Supreme Court decides.
Or, he could just vote for if he's so sure it's unconstitutional.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
13. wonder if Byrd wll weigh in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thecrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #13
23. I gave up on Byrd when he voted for scAlito
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
19. Webb talked about congress making Truman do something in WWII
yesterday on MTP. I foget the details but I'm sure it's in that great video of the Graham smackdown!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 04:57 PM
Response to Original message
20. So Warner thinks we have a Dictator and not checks & balances?

Well, let Congress pull the funding for Dumbya's "strategery."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
21. Son of a b**** is he for real
Section I of the Constitution forgot the article number, says that congress must approve a war. And the war is declared bush has the authority to deploy the troops, but the congress has to approve it first. I'll take a look and find the article number I think it is 3.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
old guy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-16-07 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
22. How come the right wingers always get away with just making
stuff up and never having to explain in detail their reasons. Before there can be a strategy for war, it must be declared, and only congress can do that. I don't see anything unconstitutional here. Congress is just basically telling him that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 01st 2014, 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC