Related Citations
-
Adam Mendel, The First AUMF: The Northwest Indian War, 1790-1795, And the War on Terror, 18 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 1309 (2016).
Proposing that the Northwest Indian War was the United States’ first authorization of the use of military force and that this conflict can inform an originalist understanding of the War Powers Clause and the President’s role as Commander in Chief.
-
Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash, The Separation and Overlap of War and Military Powers, 87 Tex. L. Rev. 299 (2008).
Arguing that the Constitution’s text and structure, as well as historical practice, support the concept of a powerful Commander in Chief, but that the President lacks exclusive military powers and is subject to congressional direction in all military matters.
-
David J. Barron & Martin S. Lederman, The Commander in Chief at the Lowest Ebb—Framing the Problem, Doctrine, and Original Understanding, 121 Harv. L. Rev. 689 (2008).
Arguing that the Framers intended the legislature to possess power over the Commander in Chief in all matters pertaining to war-making, except those that would deprive him of military superintendence.
-
Eugene V. Rostow, Great Cases Make Bad Law: The War Powers Act, 50 Tex. L. Rev. 833 (1972).
Contending that the Framers intended Congress to have the last word on matters of peace and war, but that the President’s war-making authority goes far beyond the power to repel sudden attacks.