Conyers V. Reagan

[Ozymanithrax]

This should be considered in our discussion of Obama's probably violation of the War Powers Resolution.
From the Center for Constitutional Rights.

Description
In October 1983, President Ronald Reagan announced that he had ordered a pre-dawn invasion of Grenada by nearly 1,900 Marines and armed airborne troops under the code name “Urgent Fury.” The fighting was heavier than expected and by the end of the month, the United States military presence had reached more than 5,600 troops. After a few days of heavy fighting and a number of deaths, the shooting ended.

The invasion and occupation constituted, within the meaning of the War Powers Clause of the U.S. Constitution, a war against the people of Grenada. The President, however, at no time sought the required congressional approval. He justified the invasion by claiming falsely that the lives of U.S. medical students were in danger. The same pretext was given to justify the U.S. invasion of the Dominican Republic in 1965.

Within a few weeks of the invasion, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), the National Conference of Black Lawyers, the National Lawyers Guild and the ACLU filed suit on behalf of Congressman John Conyers and 10 other members of Congress, challenging the invasion as a violation of the War Powers Clause. The suit requested a judgment that the invasion had taken place in violation of the U.S. Constitution and that all U.S. forces should therefore leave Grenada. The government moved to dismiss the case, arguing that members of Congress are not permitted to bring such suits as they have adequate remedies within Congress. The government also argued that the case was moot because there were only 300 U.S. troops remaining in Grenada.

The court granted the government’s motion to dismiss on the ground that the congressional plaintiffs had other remedies. The plaintiffs appealed and the federal appeals court ruled that the case was moot since most U.S. troops had been withdrawn from Grenada.

A lot of discussion about Obama's possible violation of the Warpowers Resoltuion. I suspect that Obama would use this in his defense, if it does come up, and it will be determined that Congress has other remedies.

[ProSense]

1. Why would the President

want to draw a correlation between the U.N. sanctioned no-fly zone over Libya and the unilateral invasion of Grenada?

[Ozymanithrax]

2. We are not required to act when the UN says jump.

The question has been raised concerning the legality of putting troops into combat without consulting with Congress.

The Resolution states.

TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 33 > § 1542

§ 1542. Consultation; initial and regular consultations

The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.

It says "in every possible instant shall," which says to me that there is a possibility when combat happens without the chance to consult with congress. There was no surprise attack by Libya on the U.S. We were involved in talks for weeks with allies, but only decided when it appeared the rebels were about to be wiped out in Benghazi. I think he had a reasonable ability to consult with Congress and simply chose not to.

I also think that Congress will not try to use those other measures mentioned in Conyers V Reagan. We have reached a point where it is within Congresses power to halt the executive branch but choses not to. Bunch of Chicken Shit cowards if you ask me.

I also think that protecting civilians was the right thing to do, I just think he did it the wrong way and Congress should censure him for it.

[ProSense]

3. "The question has been raised concerning the legality of putting troops

without consulting with Congress."

There are no troops in combat in Libya.

The question about consulting Congress has been raised.

President Obama acted under the U.N. Charter and fulfilled the War Powers Act requirements: with Congress, notified Congress within 48 hours and now has 60 days to submit a report.

[Ozymanithrax]

4. We have pilots in combat over Libya...

which means we have troops in combat in Libya as Libya owns that air space.

By firing crusie missiles, the crews of those ships enter combat with Libya.

Also, the UN's approval of a resolution is not a binding directive to engage an act of war. It allows those countires that chose to enter combat and defend those citizens. It does not in anyway require that we act as say an attack on a NATO country would require we act.

I do agree that the item you linked appears to show the President did Consult.

At 12:30 p.m. on Friday, the President met in the Situation Room with a bipartisan group of congressional leaders on Libya for one hour. There was a group in the Situation Room and there was a larger group of the leadership on the telephone.

This is something I've looking for.

Thankyou.