Republican Texas Senator and
likely presidential hopeful Ted Cruz recently released a report in which he
details 76
alleged abuses of power by President
Barack Obama. Many of the items on Cruz’s list are undeniable abuses of
executive power such as the extrajudicial killing of Americans overseas by
drones without due process, the continuation of aid to Egypt
despite it being against American law to give aid to military juntas involved
in coups, and treating secured creditors worse than unsecured creditors in the Chrysler
bankruptcy.
What is most shocking is not what
appears on Senator Cruz’s list but what does not appear anywhere on it. Despite
mentioning President Obama’s reference to the Fort
Hood shooting as workplace violence
rather than as an act of terrorism, Senator fails to mention President Obama’s
unconstitutional military action in Libya.
If the biggest issue with the President was a matter of semantics, things would
sure be peaceful. However, President Obama egregiously violated the
Constitution which mandates that only Congress may declare war. President Obama
launched his so called kinetic military action in Libya
without the approval of Congress. The War Powers Resolution of 1973—which is
itself likely unconstitutional—gave the President the limited power to
introduce American military force overseas “in the absence of a declaration of
war”:
The constitutional
powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed
Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in
hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only
pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or
(3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its
territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
Qaddafi and the Libyan government
had not declared war against the United States.
Congress did not give specific statutory authorization for President Obama’s
kinetic military action against Libya.
And there was no national emergency or anything even resembling an imminent
attack planned by Libya
against the United States.
Therefore, President Obama’s military intervention in Libya—which
was the catalyst which caused the blowback that led to the tragic murder of
four Americans in Benghazi—was
unconstitutional. In fact, if any actions performed in office by President
Obama have been deserving of impeachment, his actions against Libya
have.
Why is it that Senator Cruz does
not believe that President Obama’s Libyan actions were unlawful abuses of
power? With Senator Cruz shaping up to be a serious future contender for the
Republican presidential nomination, this is an important question. It suggests
that Senator Cruz believes that the president has the constitutional authority
to wage war without the approval of Congress. If so, that means that he may be
no different in his outlook on foreign policy and the Constitution than
President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama.
It seems unlikely that this was a
mere omission on Senator Cruz’s part. After all, if his list includes the
complaint that members of President Obama’s staff owe back taxes, then it is
clear that he has pretty much cleared the decks and mentioned every complaint
that he had with the Commander-in-Chief. This makes it appear likely that
Senator Cruz may be a neoconservative posing as a Tea Partier. While Senator
Cruz rightly opposed using the American military directly in support of Al
Qaeda-affiliated Syrian rebels, he did propose that the United
States military should invade
Syria in order to secure and destroy its chemical weapons.
Unconstitutional interventionist
foreign policy has been one of the most problematic parts of President Obama’s
disastrous presidency. If Senator Cruz is ultimately an interventionist who
believes in the unconstitutional neocon idea of the Imperial President, then he
should admit it. If not, he should add President Obama’s Libyan misadventure as
the 77th item on his list.
No comments:
Post a Comment