Even without the war on terror, Congress gave the president the power to wage war for two weeks however they are fit. Congress is supposed to be notified and they can approve more time, but it’s been violated multiple times with no consequences.
Comment on Why would America declaring cartels terrorist organizations be a problem for Mexico?
refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 1 week ago
After the War on Terror was declared, it meant that the executive branch could essentially go to war with any country if they call them terrorists without former approval from Congress.
ryathal@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
OldChicoAle@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Sounds unconstitutional
refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 1 week ago
It is, but… you know.
HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 week ago
A problem with the constitution is that the framers didn’t expect items to be defined differently than today. No one really expected a mass deployment of troops that wouldn’t be called a war.
Also, the framers didn’t expect Congress to roll over as much as it has to the President.
refurbishedrefurbisher@lemmy.sdf.org 6 days ago
More generally, the founders wrote the constitution as if every leader will act in good faith. That has proven to be a bad idea, but also how do you even account for that? Their idea was a system of checks and balances, but that failed to account for when one party has control over every branch, and for when one branch goes rogue and starts ignoring the other two branches, as we are seeing now with the executive.
IMO, limiting power (money in the case of a capitalistic society) is the only way. The founders had the right idea with the limitation of power, but they didn’t take that idea to the economic side of things. Force all corporations to be worker owned coops and have a hard wealth cap of $50 million by taxing anything over at a rate of 100%.