War Powers Act Essay

479 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: American involvement in Vietnam

Brooke McCoy Mr Durr POL 111 War Powers When the War Powers act was created in 1973, it was intended to check the president’s power. As the bill past it resulted in the President and Congress coming to a joint resolution where both have judgement in the Armed Forces. When the United States commits to an armed conflict without the consent of the U.S Congress. There is many talk that is the War Powers act is it constitutional or not? I believe that it is constitutional because the act check the power of the Executive branch with Legislative branch. But how does the the act attempt to limit the power of the president? The president’s involvement gives him the title of commander-in-Chief. He is in charge of the United States Armed Forces, but …show more content…

The president can declare war but must consult with Congress and keep giving congress updates regularly which must be given to the speaker of the house until the U.S armed forces are no longer apart of conflict or have been removed from conflict. So because the President must report to Congress it does not have total power and the war power act was created to check the power of the president so as it checks the power in the president that he can not have completely to having total control over the United States Armed Forces. It has been effectively made to use because the act was created to prevent future Vietnams. Being Vietnam was a war between North and South Korea. The U.S’s involvement was believed to stop the threat of spread of Communism and people believed that the United States should have not gotten involved and is was a mistake because Thousands of Americans were forced to fight and lost their lives in Vietnam. As the War Powers act that was created in 1973. I believe that it is constitutional because the act check and balance the Executive Branch with the United States Armed Forces. It was created so that Congress would know what is going on with the Armed Forces and it prevents future

Show More
Related

  • Comparing Imperial Presidency by Arthur Schlesinger and Presidental Power by Richard Neustadt

    2161 Words  | 5 Pages

    to declare war was vested in the Congress. This decision set the stage for the

    Read More

  • The War Powers Act of 1973

    1541 Words  | 4 Pages

    The War Powers Act of 1973. The War Powers Act limits the power of the President of the United States to wage war without the approval of the Congress. The War Powers Act is also known as the War Powers Resolution. The purpose of the War Powers Resolution is to ensure that Congress and the President share in making decisions that may get the United States involved in hostilities.

    Read More

  • How Did The Founding Fathers To Create A Government In The United States?

    584 Words  | 2 Pages

    In both wars, “Presidents have often engaged in military operations without express Congressional consent. These operations include the Korean War, the Vietnam War,” (War Powers 2008). The result of the action to go to war in Vietnam led to the passing of the the War Powers Resolution in 1973. Since World War II, the presidency seemed to have control over Congress, which did change after the Vietnam War. The wars, though, were meant to protect the ideals of democracy in other parts of the world. However, to their claim, they say that, “since the Constitution was adopted there have been at least 125 instances in which the President has ordered the armed forces to take action or maintain positions abroad without obtaining prior congressional authorization, starting with the ‘undeclared war’ with France,” (Woods). However, they include several things that were very small, and not very large scale attacks, not even against other federal

    Read More

  • The Relationship between Congress and the President in Policymaking from Mid-19th century to Present-Day.

    580 Words  | 2 Pages

    The U.S. Constitution gives military responsibility to both the executive branch and legislative branch, but scholars have long debated the jurisdiction of their War Powers. In the past century presidents have further and further ignored the constitutional requirements for taking military action.

    Read More

  • The War Powers Act

    1037 Words  | 3 Pages

    One of the biggest debated concerning the separation of powers it the attempt to determine which branch has the constitutional authority to undertake the involvement of war. This brings us to the argument of the constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution passed by congress in 1973 in effort to balance powers between congress and the president. Section 3 of the War Powers Resolution act states: "The President in every possible instance...

    Read More

  • War Powers Resolution

    1613 Words  | 4 Pages

    The War Powers Resolution was the result of a consistent and ongoing power struggle between the President and Congress in the United States. The Constitution of the United States lays out the powers of the different branches of government. These branches are specifically designed to check each other to create a balance of power. In regards to foreign security affairs, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that the Congress has the power to declare war, maintain the army and navy, and control war funding. Under article II, section 2 the President is the Commander and Chief of the Army and Navy. The President can also veto a declaration of war made by the Congress which must be overturned by a 3/4ths vote by the Congress. The Presidential veto power was also used to create a hurdle for the Legislative branch in passing this policy. However, as this essay will establish, the Congress was able to pass the bill despite the opposition from the Executive branch. The War Powers Resolution is a controversial piece of legislation because it challenged the power of the President as the Commander and Chief of the army and navy. This challenge was perpetrated by Congress in order to check this power of the President and strengthen the significance of the right to declare war.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The Gulf Of Tonkin Incidents

    1126 Words  | 3 Pages

    On August 2, 1964 reports came to Washington that the USS Maddox in the Gulf on Tonkin was under torpedo attach by the North Vietnamese. The USS Maddox was able to repel the attack and President Johnson took no action. Two days later, on August 4, 1964, more reports came in of a possible second attack. On August 7, 1964, three days after the second attack, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed and gave President Lyndon B. Johnson the power to use military force in Vietnam without the direct consent of Congress. Forty years after the fact, Professor David L. Anderson postulates that the two attacks, referred to as the Gulf of Tonkin Incidents, were used as a “pretext” to pass a resolution that allowed President Johnson the power to use military force without direct congressional consent. The main statement in the Golf of Tonkin Resolution reads, “Congress approves and supports the determination of the President, as Commander in Chief, to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression.” This statement grants President Johnson the responsibility to use his own “determination” in deciding how to proceed in Vietnam, basically giving him, what many refer to as, a blank check. It is known that the Constitution of the United States gives the power to declare war solely to Congress. Although the resolution doesn’t explicitly give this power to the president, it does allow him to act with war like responses (air raids, bombing, ground combat, etc.) to any conflict in Southeast Asia without the permission of Congress. This was one of the largest shifts in the balance of powers of the government branches the country had ever seen. However, the Gulf of To...

    Read More

  • Vietnam War Dbq Analysis

    947 Words  | 2 Pages

    The war increased caution about involvement in foreign affairs. After Vietnam, we weighed the risks much more about intruding in another nation's problems in the fear of having another war. Also, we were scared to use military power in almost any circumstance because we were scared of another Vietnam War, this was called Vietnam Syndrome. In document 7 the War Powers Act is discussed. The purpose of this act is to check the president's power to start an armed conflict. The president needs consent of congress to authorize the use of the military. This is a big deal because congress never declared war on Vietnam. Also, document 8 has to do with using military powers in foreign conflicts because many American Soldiers who fought in Vietnam are now in congress. The document stated “But the Vietnam experience has given almost all of them a sense of seasoned caution about using American military power without having the broad support of the the American people.” This is major because we now see how if a country's soldiers and people do not even understand what they are fighting for, the outcome is not going to be

    Read More

  • Three Fifths Compromise

    1343 Words  | 3 Pages

    However, our constitution is thorough enough to both grant the president special powers, but also limit his powers enough to prevent abusive power useage. The president is our commander in chief, he is allowed to make treaties, he has the power of the veto, and he can choose the cabinet, amongst other powers. While some were against the presidency, a compromise was reached through checks and balances. The Constitution made it so that each branch limited each other from having too much power. For example, the Legislative branch keeps the Executive branch (and the president) in check. If the president decides to veto a bill, the Legislative branch, Congress, can override that veto. Similarly, the Supreme Court, or the Judicial branch, can prevent Congress from passing a law if it declares it to be

    Read More

  • Presidency and Foreign Policy Making

    1680 Words  | 4 Pages

    Welch, Gruhl, Rigdon and Thomas (2011) assert that, according to Article II of the U.S. Constitution, the executive power is granted solely to the President of the U.S. This clause of the constitution has continued to draw significant constitutional debate since the ratification of the Constitution. For example, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, in 1793 questioned whether the clause affords residual power to the President outside the enumerated powers stipulated in the Constitution. This debate is still significant in the contemporary times because it has a direct impact on the power of the President, and also, as an essential insinuation, it impacts on the freedoms and liberties of U.S. citizenry at home and in foreign countries. In this context, Pika and Maltese (2004) argue that, it is essential to mention a number of prominent Supreme Court cases that involve the outline of executive powers that have transpired, informed by in the perspective of foreign affairs, as well war. Therefore, it is not unforeseen that today, in the War on Terror, the...

    Read More

  • Essay On President's Legislative Power

    588 Words  | 2 Pages

    The President of the United States is considered to be the most powerful person in the world. However, the President is not given the full power, as we think they are given. The President’s legislative powers are defined by a checks and balances system among the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch of the American Government. What are the President’s legislative powers? The two main legislative powers the President has is to pass or sign a bill and to veto a bill. However, even if the President vetoes a bill, Congress can still override that veto by a two-thirds vote from both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

    Read More

  • International Humanitarian Law: The History Of International Humanitarian Law

    950 Words  | 2 Pages

    Under international law, there are two distinct rules applicable to war. These rules includes; the reasons for war and how war is to be fought. Theoretically, a just war can be fought in an unfair manner or to be engaged in an unjust war while complying with the laws of armed conflict. Therefore, the two branches of law are completely independent of one another.

    Read More

  • The United States' Foreign Policy with Cuba

    542 Words  | 2 Pages

    Congress can also play a part in foreign policies. The framers did not clearly define weather the president or congress had the power over the process, so there is often turmoil when these issues arise. But congress can veto a decision regarding, military action, made by the president if he actually hands it to congress before he carries it out. Other than military, congress must approve any other potential laws proposed by the president.

    Read More

  • Thirty Years War Essay

    1724 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Thirty Years War was a series of conflicts, not-knowingly involving most European countries from 1618 to 1648. The war, which was fought mainly in Germany, was started when Bohemian Protestants furiously attacked the Holy Roman Emperor in terms to impose a restriction on their religious and civil liberties. By understanding the Thirty Years War, you will notice the notable religious, political and social changes. The changes paved the religious and political maps of Europe. Not only did this war affect the religious and political demographic, it caused populations to perish and lose large amounts of their goods. What was known as a religious battle, turned out to be a political feud in competition of which state has the greater power affecting men, women, soldiers and civilians. “[The bohemians] had no idea that their violent deed would set off a chain reaction of armed conflict that would last thirty years and later be called Europe’s “first world war” of the modern era.” When the war ended, the lands were defiled and over 5 million people were killed.

    Read More

  • War Crime Essay

    1125 Words  | 3 Pages

    A war crime is an unjust act of violence in which a military personnel violates the laws and acceptable behaviors of a war. Despite all the violence in a war, a soldier shooting another is not considered a war crime because it is not a violation to the laws and practices of a war, and it is considered just. A war crime is defined as a “violations [violation] of the laws and customs of war” (“War Crimes”), and are attacks “against civilian populations, prisoners of war, or in some cases enemy soldiers in the field” (Friedman). War crimes are typically committed with weapons or by uncommon, cruel, devastating military methods and are “…Committed primarily by military personnel” (Friedman). There are many different types of war crimes one can commit, including “murder, ill treatment…murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages or devastation not justified by military necessity” (Friedman). Originally constructed as international law by the London Charter on August 8th, 1945 and further developed by the Hague Conventions of 1899, 1907 and the Nuremberg trials, war crimes are aggressive, unacceptable and unjust actions performed by military workforce that occur during a war.

    Read More

More about War Powers Act Essay

Open Document