Is the US constitution dead?

Both presidential candidates George W Bush and Barack Obama said that the USA should not be the worlds policeman or engage in foreign nation building. In doing so they paid lip service to the US constitution. Here another potential presidential candidate, Rand Paul, says the words that must be popular (why else would they keep saying it). However I doubt he will use his senate position to argue that the current president be impeached. That would hurt his popularity. It is however the only way for congress to assert that it has ultimate authority in such matters.

My view on the Libyan no fly zone is layered. In the first instance it is nothing to do with Australia so we should in essence ignore it. From a US constitutional perspective it seems clear that the UN is seen by many as having more moral and practical authority than congress. From a military perspective it seems mad to enforce a stalemate and if your going to make yourself an enemy of the Libyan government you should make the destruction of the Libyan government a core military objective. I don’t see any shining lights in this fiasco.

5 thoughts on “Is the US constitution dead?

  1. I think that the reason that no-one has written a comment here is because we don’t really know much about the US Constitution, and so don’t feel empowered to make inciteful comments on it.
    Maybe we should broaden the issue to talk about what any Constitution, including ours, should allow any executive to do. the posting on Parliamentary powers is a good opening- keep it up!

  2. No. Because I think Terje is wrong that the Libyan war is a failure. They should should press on the objectives harder.

    He is merely speculating as was the Bush strategy.

  3. Sorry. I believed that you inferred as much.

    I don’t see how the current war is a breach. Perhaps you can outline it.

  4. The situation in Libya is not an immediate threat to the USA. So without congressional approval any military engagement in Libya is unconstitutional. It may be morally the right thing to do, it may be militarily possible however it doesn’t seem to be legal.

Comments are closed.