George Will argues Congress has little role in war powers. But the Constitution gives it the authority for a reason: to restrain executive ambition.

‘I n the maelstrom of modern war, presumed certainties crumble like piecrust.” So George Will begins a recent Washington Post column. Indeed, certainties like Will’s own adamantine commitment to the constitutional separation of powers.

He begins his column as an impatient tutor, instructing us against all the evidence of our senses that the Founders’ putting the power to declare war, raise armies, and fund war amounts to “almost nothing.” He ends the column in a contrary, almost rueful tone, sighing that there’s simply nothing to be done about the imperious executive when it comes to war.

About the Author

Michael Brendan Dougherty

Michael Brendan Dougherty is a senior writer at National Review Online.

Featured Tags

‘I n the maelstrom of modern war, presumed certainties crumble like piecrust.” So George Will begins a recent Washington Post column. Indeed, certainties like Will’s own adamantine commitment to the constitutional separation of powers.

He begins his column as an impatient tutor, instructing us against all the evidence of our senses that the Founders’ putting the power to declare war, raise armies, and fund war amounts to “almost nothing.” He ends the column in a contrary, almost rueful tone, sighing that there’s simply nothing to be done about the imperious executive when it comes to war.