Which of the Following Is the Only Part of Government That Can Declare War

Power to Declare War

"The Congress shall accept Power To . . . provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the The states."
—U.Southward. Constitution, Article I, section viii, clause 1

"The Congress shall have Power . . . To declare War, grant Messages of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules apropos Captures on Land and Water;
"To heighten and support Armies, only no Cribbing of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than 2 Years;
"To provide and maintain a Navy;
"To brand Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Marriage, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the Us, reserving to usa respectively, the Date of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia co-ordinate to the discipline prescribed by Congress"
—U.Due south. Constitution, Article I, department 8, clauses eleven–16

Origins

Like many powers articulated in the U.S. Constitution, Congress' authority to declare war was revolutionary in its design, and a clear break from the past when a handful of European monarchs controlled the continent'due south affairs.

The framers of the Constitution—reluctant to concentrate too much influence in the hands of too few—denied the part of the President the authority to go to state of war unilaterally. If America was going to survive as a republic, they reasoned, declarations of war required careful debate in open forums among the public's representatives.¹

"The provision of the Constitution giving the war-making powers to Congress, was dictated, as I understand information technology, by the following reasons," a immature first-term Congressman named Abraham Lincoln wrote in 1848 during America's War with Mexico. "Kings had ever been involving and impoverishing their people in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the skilful of the people was the object. This, our [Ramble] Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one human should concord the power of bringing this oppression upon u.s.."²

Constitutional Framing

/tiles/not-collection/i/i_origins_biennal_elections_madison_hc.xml Drove of the U.S. House of Representatives
Almost this object James Madison was an integral part of the constitutional framing of the House.

Initially, delegates to the Constitutional Convention discussed America's war powers in general terms, briefly mentioning the "common defence, security of liberty and general welfare" of the land's citizens.³ And then in early June, 1787, Charles Pinkney of S Carolina argued for "a vigorous Executive," reopening the war powers result. But to give the part war-making powers would turn the President into an elected monarch, Pinkney argued. Other delegates, including John Rutledge of S Carolina, James Wilson of Pennsylvania, and James Madison of Virginia agreed, concluding that the powers of state of war and peace were best reserved for the national legislature.^four

By August, the framers had even so to decide where to vest the country's war powers. Pierce Butler of S Carolina favored the Executive role as best suited to brand war. But in that location was a growing sense that such awe-inspiring responsibleness belonged with the legislative co-operative. Non everyone was convinced that the House and Senate should share the power, however, and Pinkney felt that since the Senate already had jurisdiction over treaties, information technology alone should have discretion to make up one's mind war matters as well.

Madison and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts sought a center ground. For Gerry, giving a single office the entirety of the country'due south war powers contradicted the goals of a republic, and he and Madison proposed a quick edit, replacing "make" with "declare" then that the Constitution would read "Congress shall take power to declare war." The change codification congressional dominance merely made the clause flexible enough to enable the President to defend the country during emergencies. The delegates worried that Congress would be out of session or would act also slowly if strange forces invaded America. So, despite their resolve to dilute Executive power, they gave the office an implied authorisation to "brand war" every bit an insurance policy of sorts for America'south security.

Similar George Bricklayer of Virginia, the founders felt that war should be difficult to enter, and they expected congressional debate to restrain the war-making process.

On Baronial 17, 1787, the land delegations agreed to strike "make" and insert "declare" by a vote of 8 to 1 (initially information technology had been 7 to two, merely Connecticut switched its position), and in doing so committed the war powers to Congress. "The constitution supposes, what the History of all Govts demonstrates," Madison wrote to Thomas Jefferson a few years later, "that the Ex. is the co-operative of ability well-nigh interested in state of war, & most decumbent to it. Information technology has accordingly with studied care, vested the question of war in the Legisl."⁶

Constitutional Bug

Of the Constitution's many checks and balances, few take go as controversial and as consequential equally the country'due south state of war powers. Article I is clear in giving Congress the power to declare war and to federalize state militias. But Article II, department two, names the President "Commander in Chief of the Regular army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when chosen into the bodily Service of the United States." Although the framers ensured that a civilian would lead America's war machine, ramble scholars have debated for years whether the position of Commander in Chief actually gives the President authorisation to open up hostilities or whether information technology was merely a title the Founders conferred on the master magistrate.⁷

When combined with the President's implied privilege to brand war, the question of whether the Commander in Chief carries additional power becomes an event of vast ramble outcome, something that'southward plagued the federal system and its scholars over time.⁸ While a close reading of the Convention debates suggests that the framers intended to limit Presidents to defensive deportment, a number of administrations, especially after World War II, have broadly interpreted the notion of a defensive war and have committed U.South. military without congressional authority only to enquire for it later, if they ask for it at all.⁹ 1 recent written report has described the Constitution'southward language on initiating hostilities as "ambiguous" and more than one scholar has described the Executive state of war power as "vague."^ten In summarizing the relationship between 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and Capitol Hill, another political scientist has written recently that "the Constitution is a paradoxical mix of clearly divers war powers for Congress and implied prerogatives for the president," which over the years created "an uneasy balance betwixt the branches."^eleven

For almost of U.S. history, the Constitution'southward checks and balances worked, and more often than not Presidents sought the consent of Congress on state of war matters. The period following Globe War 2, however, saw the President'due south war-making discretion accomplish a level that made many legislators nervous. By the early 1970s, the human relationship between the legislative and executive branches reached something of a tipping indicate.

The onset of the Common cold State of war, combined with America's international obligations equally a fellow member of the Un (Un) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), stretched the executive branch's foreign policy footprint to corners of the world that the framers of the Constitution could never have imagined. In the summer of 1950, for example, the President ordered an American response to North korea'due south attack on Southward Korea, and later committed ground forces in Korea after the UN Security Council asked for assist.¹² And after consecutive administrations committed America'south military to combat operations in the Dominican Commonwealth, Laos, and Vietnam without formally declaring state of war, Congress' mood soured to the betoken that information technology passed the War Powers Resolution in November 1973. Equally stated in the legislation, Congress drafted the War Powers Resolution "to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the U.s. and insure that the commonage sentence of both the Congress and the President volition apply to the introduction of United states of america Armed services into hostilities." Since its enactment, however, the War Powers Resolution has had scant, if whatsoever, effect on the military machine decisions of sitting Presidents. In fact, many administrations have just "refused to recognize its constitutionality," co-ordinate to two political scientists who've studied Congress' power to influence the White House on war matters.¹³

Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Utilise of Military Strength

/tiles/non-collection/4/4-twenty-War_gavel-2005_124_000.xml Collection of the U.S. House of Representatives
About this object This gavel was used during the December 11, 1941, session in which the Firm approved the declarations of war against Federal republic of germany and Italy. Gavels used in historically meaning sessions were occasionally presented as memorabilia.

Since 1789, Congress has alleged war 11 times, against 10 countries, during five dissever conflicts: Peachy Britain (1812, War of 1812); Mexico (1846, War with United mexican states); Spain (1898, Spanish-American War, also known as the War of 1898); Germany (1917, World War I); Austro-hungarian empire (1917, Earth War I); Nihon (1941, Earth War II); Germany (1941, World State of war II); Italy (1941, World War II); Republic of bulgaria (1942, World War Ii); Republic of hungary (1942, Earth War II); and Rumania (1942, World War II).^fourteen In each of these 11 instances, the President appealed to Congress for authorization either in person before a Articulation Session or in a written request.¹⁵

Far more common, specially in the modern era, take been congressional authorizations for the use of military force (AUMF) abroad. Historically, AUMFs take been much narrower in telescopic and much more limited than formal declarations of war, such as when Congress gave the President clearance to protect American ships against French aggression in 1789 and against Tripoli's navy in 1802. After World State of war II, however, AUMFs became much broader, frequently granting Presidents sweeping say-so to engage America's military around the world.^xvi Accept, for instance, the Tonkin Gulf Resolution of 1964. Every bit communist forces in Vietnam took increasingly militaristic actions against U.Southward. forces, Congress authorized the President, in sweeping but vague language, "to promote the maintenance of international peace and security in southeast Asia."¹⁷

In fact, despite engaging in conflicts in places like Vietnam and Iraq over the last 70 years, Congress has not declared war since 1942. Rather, the individual congressional AUMFs have been interpreted "as fully empowering the President to prosecute the wars," co-ordinate to law professors, Curtis A. Bradley and Jack L. Goldsmith.¹⁸ Although the concept of the AUMF has existed since the start of the Republic, the specific use of the term became commonplace in the 1990s during the Gulf War.¹⁹

The Business firm's Role

For well-nigh of the mod era, the House has acted rapidly once Presidents take requested formal declarations of war. Traditionally, the House Committee on Foreign Affairs has considered bills sending American troops to fight abroad, and in at least one instance, in 1924, the Business firm has pulled "legislation tending to promote peace and discourage war" from the Judiciary Committee and referred it to the Commission on Armed forces Affairs.²⁰ Beginning with World State of war Two, all declarations of state of war accept come earlier Congress as joint resolutions, and in each instance the House suspended the rules in social club to quickly pass the measure out.²¹

The conclusion to send the nation to war is mayhap Congress's gravest responsibility, and in the House state of war votes can be solemn, weighty occasions. For the Members, to declare state of war against a strange power is to transport their constituents, their neighbors, their family, and even themselves into damage'southward way.

1 twenty-four hour period after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in early December 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt addressed a Articulation Session of Congress, laying out his cause for war. When the House gathered immediately later to discuss Roosevelt's request, Jeannette Rankin of Montana repeatedly sought recognition to address the bedroom. Twenty-four years earlier, Rankin had voted against America's entry into World State of war I, and on the eve of World War II, even as the war resolution against Nihon went through its showtime reading, Speaker Sam Rayburn of Texas, who witnessed Rankin's previous vote in 1917, refused to recognize her. As Members prepared for the concluding vote, many approached Rankin hoping to convince her to vote for the war; at the very least they hoped she would vote nowadays, or abstain all together. When the reading clerk reached her proper name during the roll call on the resolution's final passage, Rankin voted no, the just vote against. The bill passed 388–ane. "Every bit a adult female I can't go to war," she said, "and I refuse to transport anyone else." After the chamber erupted in protest to her vote, Rankin waited in a phone berth before the Capitol Police force escorted her back to her role.

With 1 exception early on, votes to declare war in the Business firm tended to pass with overwhelming majorities. Declaring war or passing an AUMF, withal, is only the offset pace. In one case the fighting begins, Congress assumes another constitutional role: that of oversight.

Country (State of war)	Engagement	House Vote
Great Great britain (War of 1812)	June four, 1812	79–49
Mexico (War with Mexico)	May 11, 1846	174–14
Spain (War of 1898)	April 25, 1898	Vocalisation vote
Germany (World War I)	April half dozen, 1917	373–50
Austro-hungarian empire (World War I)	Dec 7, 1917	365–i
Japan (World War Two)	December 8, 1941	388–ane
Germany (Globe War II)	December 11, 1941	393–0
Italia (Earth State of war 2)	December 11, 1941	399–0
Bulgaria (World War II)	June 3, 1942	357–0
Republic of hungary (World War 2)	June 3, 1942	360–0
Rumania (World War II)	June iii, 1942	361–022

For Further Reading

Bradley, Curtis A. and Jack Fifty. Goldsmith, "Congressional Potency and the War on Terrorism." Harvard Constabulary Review 118 no. 7 (2005): 2047–2133.

Burgess, Susan R. "War Powers." In The Encyclopedia of the United states of america Congress, edited by Donald C. Bacon, et al., vol. four, pages 2097–2100. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995.

Cannon'southward Precedents of the House of Representatives of the U.s.a.. Volume 7, §1894. GPO: Washington, D.C., 1935.

Deschler's Precedents of the Firm of Representatives of the U.s.. Volume iii, Affiliate xiii, §iii–eleven. Washington, D.C.: Regime Printing Office, 1976–1977.

Elsea, Jennifer 1000. and Matthew C. Weed. "Declarations of War and Authorizations for the Use of Military Force: Historical Groundwork and Legal Implications." Congressional Enquiry Service, 18 April 2014, RL31133.

Fisher, Louis. President and Congress: Ability and Policy. The Gratuitous Press: New York, 1972.

_____. Presidential War Power. Lawrence, Kan.: University Printing of Kansas, 1995.

_____. Constitutional Conflicts between Congress and the President. 4th edition. Lawrence, Kan.: University Press of Kansas, 1997.

_____. Congressional Abdication on War and Spending. Higher Station, Tex.: Texas A&M Academy Press, 2000.

_____. "Clinton'southward Armed forces Activity: No Rivals in Sight." In Rivals for Ability: Presidential-Congressional Relations, edited by James A. Thurber, pages 229–254. Lanham, Doc.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Fowler, Linda L. "Congressional War Powers." In The Oxford Handbook of the American Congress, edited by Eric Schickler and Frances E. Lee, pages 812–833. Oxford University Press, 2011.

Hinds' Precedents of the Business firm of Representatives of the United States. Vol. IV, §4164. GPO: Washington, D.C., 1907.

Howell, William Thousand. and Jon C. Pevenhouse. While Dangers Get together: Congressional Checks on Presidential War Powers. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007.

Katzmann, Robert A. "War Powers Resolution." In The Encyclopedia of the United states of america Congress, vol.. iv, edited by Donald C. Bacon, et al., pages 2100–2102. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995.

Kriner, Douglas L. After the Rubicon: Congress, Presidents, and the Politics of Waging War. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.

Torreon, Barbara Salazar. "Instances of Utilise of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-2015." Congressional Enquiry Service, xv January 2015. R42738.

Weed, Matthew C. "The State of war Powers Resolution: Concepts and Practice." Congressional Research Service, 3 April 2015. R42699

Zeisberg, Mariah. State of war Powers: The Politics of Constitutional Authority. Princeton: Princeton Academy Press, 2013.

byrdshenctuders.blogspot.com

Source: https://history.house.gov/Institution/Origins-Development/War-Powers/

Share this post