In the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, false intelligence and general Bush administration fear mongering, there was an avalanche of Congressional acts that ceded power to the president.

Members of Congress had not yet wiped the debris of ground zero from their eyes and they, like all of us, were making choices about the future of our nation. Even under these extraordinary conditions the wording of Congressional joint resolutions authorizing the use of military force in the “War On Terror” were miraculously succinct and narrow.

The execution of those resolutions by the Bush Administration has been broad and nearly unfettered.

The right-wing warriors for strict construction of the Constitution and other laws should take a look at this one.

There are four operative documents that provided President Bush with the authority to invade Iraq. Equally important are the restrictions these documents place on him.

Of course, we start with the Constitution, specifically Article I, section 8, clause 11 , in which the power to declare war was specifically relegated to the Congress by our founding fathers.

Vietnam hangovers led to the War Powers Act of 1973 that more clearly articulated and thus restricted the president’s authority under the Constitution to wage and continue to wage war. Particularly interesting is section 2(a) which states:

“It is the purpose of this joint resolution to fulfill the intent of the framers of the Constitution of the United States and insure that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities , or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and to the continued use of such forces in hostilities or in such situations.”
(emphasis added)

After September 11, 2001, the Congress authorized the war in Afghanistan in Public Law 107-40 . The entirety of the authorization of use of the United States armed forces is in Section 2(a):

“[T]he President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons . . . .”

Intelligence report upon intelligence report has made it clear that Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks of September 11, 2001. Therefore, Public Law 107-40 does not grant any authority for President Bush to continue the occupation of Iraq.

Finally, there is the crown jewel of political obfuscation (take a gander at the “Whereas” clauses), Public Law 107-243 , “Authorization For Use Of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution Of 2002.” Amazingly, the text of the Congress’ actual grant of authority to the president to conduct war is terse and limited:

Section 3 (a) Authorization.--The President is authorized to use the Armed
Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

The nation of Iraq now is not a threat to the United States (was it ever?) – they can’t even protect their own country. Since the election of the Iraqi government there have been no United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding that country, much less have they violated any.

There is no current authorization for President Bush to continue this war in Iraq. It is null and our representatives in Congress would be wise to point this out.