I have been maintaining that President Obama has been within the letter of the law regarding Libya and the War Powers Resolution. Now comes Law Professor Bruce Ackerman (Professor of law and political science at Yale, author of The Decline and Fall of the American Republic) saying that this war (or kinetic action, if you prefer) doesn't meet the War Powers Resolution criteria and the President should have gone to Congress, seeking permission.
After the Vietnam War, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution, which granted the president the power to act unilaterally for 60 days in response to a "national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces." The law gave the chief executive an additional 30 days to disengage if he failed to gain congressional assent during the interim.And, Here is the article.
But... these provisions have little to do with the constitutionality of the Libyan intervention, since Libya did not attack our "armed forces." The president failed to mention this fundamental point in giving Congress notice of his decision on Monday, in compliance with another provision of the resolution. Without an armed "attack," there is no compelling reason for the president to cut Congress out of a crucial decision on war and peace....
Just as I wouldn't call for impeachment over a revealing birth certificate (but would call for each of the states to ban such a person from their ballots in future elections), I don't call for impeachment in this case, but I do think that some sort of a "Sense of the Congress" resolution is called for.
It is hereby expressed as the intent of the Congress that the authority granted by the War Powers Resolution is to be construed as approval by the Congress for the conduct of military operation pursuant to responding to a "national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces", but not to include operations that don't meet that criteria under the cloak of international approval by the United Nations, the North Atlantic Alliance or other such body. This is not to preclude humanitarian assistance and normal training and security assistance operations.Hat tip to the Althouse blog, maintained by Constitutional Law Professor Ann Althouse, assisted by some guy named Meade
Regards — Cliff