Wednesday, April 4, 2007

Final thought

A good ole fashioned Constitutional debate, indeed.

There is certainly much more to be said about the matter at hand that 4&20 Blackbirds and we have been discussing. For instance, the clause regarding the power of Congress to "make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces" is usually in reference to the UCMJ. Supreme Court case law citing this clause, as far as we know, deals with those sorts of issues, not the manner of prosecuting a war, but we expect that we will be getting an education on this generally in the months to come.

When 4&20 states that "a clear way to end the Iraq War, then, would be to pass a new resolution," we couldn't agree more.

It could be that a more indirect way would be ruled Constitutional, but why would anyone want a case that might go to the Supreme Court to proceed in any way other than for Congress to be as clear as possible that it is exercising its Constitutional powers to direct the cessation of hostilities? A separate resolution could deal with funding, also citing Constitutional powers.

One thing is certain -- if this mess ends with Congress regaining powers it has given away or has had usurped, something good will have come from it. No more vague authorizations for actions in Iraq's, Kosovo's, Bosnia's, Somalia's...

This means, of course, that Congress will have to deal with the responsibility for consequences of their actions and decisions, but we think they are big boys and girls who can handle it.

It's also what they were elected to do.

No comments: