The Corner

In Libya, No Declaration of War Required

Whether Obama has the constitutional authority to enforce a no-fly zone in Libya without congressional approval is not a difficult call. As commander in chief, the president has broad power to commit U.S. forces to combat operations — and presidents have exercised this power throughout our history. There are, of course, a number of constitutional limits on a president’s right to use of force, but Congress’s exclusive power to “declare war” — the focus of so much debate in this area — is far from the most important of these.

In the 18th century, a declaration of war was not always a necessary precursor to the use of force, and the Constitution’s Framers clearly understood this. As a general rule, a declaration was necessary if a state wished to claim the full international-law rights of a belligerent vis-à-vis its enemies and neutral powers, except where the conflict was purely defensive. Moreover, based on general practice among nations in the years leading up to the Constitution’s adoption, whether a declaration of war was necessary in any particular instance depended on a complex set of considerations involving, among other things, the identity of the other belligerent(s), purposes and goals, location, and the type of force (and forces) to be committed.

The Framers reserved the power to declare war to Congress so that only that body would be able to alter the legal regime governing an armed conflict, and to ensure that congressional action would be required before the United States entered major hostilities with one or more other powers. They left the president free to use force in other instances, subject to a number of other checks on his practical ability to involve the nation in armed conflict, including Congress’s authority over the budget and its power to raise and support armies.

The essentially punitive operations now underway against Qaddafi would not have required a declaration of war at the time the Constitution was adopted, and do not require such action today. We discuss this question further in the Washington Post.

David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey served in the Justice Department under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.

Most Popular

Film & TV

The Dan Crenshaw Moment

Given the spirit of our times, things could have gone so differently. On November 3, when Saturday Night Live comic Pete Davidson mocked Texas Republican Dan Crenshaw’s eye patch, saying he looked like a “hit man in a porno movie” — then adding, “I know he lost his eye in war or whatever” — it was a ... Read More

Fire Brenda Snipes

Brenda Snipes, the supervisor of elections in Florida’s Broward County, does not deserve to be within a thousand miles of any election office anywhere in these United States. She should be fired at the earliest possible opportunity. Snipes has held her position since 2003, in which year her predecessor, ... Read More

How Immigration Changes Britain

Almost nothing is discussed as badly in America or Europe as the subject of immigration. And one reason is that it remains almost impossible to have any sensible or rational public discussion of its consequences. Or rather it is eminently possible to have a discussion about the upsides (“diversity,” talent, ... Read More
PC Culture

The Lonely Mob

Just before the election, an Andrew Gillum intern named Shelby Shoup was arrested and charged with battery after assaulting some college Republicans on the campus of Florida State University. It was rather less exciting than that sounds: She went on a rant about “Nazis” and “fascism” — Gillum’s ... Read More

Sorry, Brian Kemp Still Won

Here was the state of play as of yesterday per the Kemp campaign’s breakdown of publicly available information: As of Saturday, November 10, 2018 (12:00 p.m.) *Information below is public.  Total votes reported: 3,924,658 Kemp: 1,975,162 (50.33%) Abrams: 1,912,383 (48.73%) Metz: ... Read More