Does the President Have Unilateral War Powers?

547 Words3 Pages
ISSUE 5 Does the President Have Unilateral War Powers? I found this to be an interesting issue about the President having unilateral war powers. I can definitely see the “grey” area and reason for this issue to arise. As stated in the book, the confusion/conflict comes from the constitution and how it’s written. In summary, the Congress is given the power to declare war and “to raise and support armies”, but the president is authorized to serve as commander-in-chief of the armed forces “when called into actual service of the United States.” This means the President has the power to move troops where he deems fit regardless of congress. See the issue here? In Issue 5 of the reading we hear two sides if the President has unilateral war powers or not. John C. Yoo is a Law professor at the University of California Berkeley says yes he does have unilateral war powers. Yoo “argues that the language of the constitution, long-accepted precedents, and the practical need for a speedy action in emergencies all support broad executive power during war.”(Taking sides p73). Yoo describes that the constitution examines the two branches power- the president as Commander-in-chief and congress with control over funding and declaring war. The Framers made it this way to be more flexible and create a more deceive action instead of going through the legislative process. Yoo believes that the President has unilateral war powers based on what is written in the Constitution and does not need Congress approval Michael Cairo on the hand thinks different. He believes the founding fathers never envisioned to grant exclusive war powers to the president. If a president wants to go to war, he must get the approval of Congress as stated in the Constitution. He says the President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally grant a military attack in a situation that does not
Open Document