Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
-- in Washington over the so called time limited scope limited military action in Libya.
We should point out that the war in -- is -- on its ninetieth day.
The day the war powers.
Acts as the president must remove troops if congress has an approved an act of war.
Joining me now the attorney who represents the ten members of congress of both parties.
Who are filing their lawsuit against President Obama to stop the hostilities and we'll -- we're joined by Jonathan Turley.
Job and also George Washington university School of Law professor good to see you again and welcome.
Hi Lou this this case what is it.
Do you believe that you will and and -- and I'm asking news forthrightly and simply.
-- used to my knowledge no one -- ever prevailed in the suit against the president of the war powers act do you really think you'll be the first.
I believe that if we can get through the standing question the administration is essentially.
Arguing that no one has the right to enforce this part of the constitution.
Essentially -- it since it outright that champion forests -- a restriction that can't be enforced.
Really doesn't exist.
-- that's our first hurdle that's what we're gonna try to overcome.
If we get -- the merits I actually feel very confident.
I think much of the fight is going to be the administration preventing the court from getting -- the merits.
Also in addition to saying that we believe he has violated the war powers resolution.
We're also saying that he's the -- -- the constitution.
And that's gonna be the first threshold question which is article one.
Section eight -- -- clause eleven that's where it says that only congress can declare war just for that has been honored in the breach.
-- Byrne centuries now.
-- -- has been -- you're actually right.
But in net arguments in advance a advocates for the administration.
I find it just rather curious is a constitutional law professor that when this constitutional question is raised.
You have other professors saying we just been ignored for 38 years that doesn't make it constitutional right -- or sores are.
Up but also they have the clause in the constitution requires congress declare war.
The fact that it's been violated for decades is -- a constitutional argument it's a convenience argument.
But we believe that this time is right and it it would this really shows the wisdom of the framers.
No need to show the wisdom of the framers to me on on the -- Well let's take a look at some of these -- President Obama.
The president does not she said.
Power under the constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack from a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent.
Threat to the nation that was Senator Obama in 2000 -- but.
He's in quite a different position now apparently.
He has ended vice president Joseph Biden hand.
That Senator Clinton -- virtually the same thing.
And once they begin -- they were awarded executive power.
They've changed and what are suggesting is quite dangerous.
You know what they're suggesting -- -- president can unilaterally take this country to war we will be spending over a billion dollars on this war.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- And we're taking out ground troops tanks were coordinating with a rebel force we are we all docked in a war.
And the were writing.
And there is no basis for any semantics here.
This is a war.
The president looks.
I think he should be embarrassed that his administration would try to constructed as a quote time limited scope limited military action.
It is war when you kill people when you attack worth more than 200 cruise missiles.
What if it's not a war then -- the war has no meaning and what the administration is basically saying is that war is what we say it is but I can't be true.
And -- I have to say if you look at the members who have bravely stepped forward in this case.
They range from Ron Paul to Dennis Kucinich from John Conyers to Walter Jones are.
These are people from across the political spectrum that share and -- by eating love for the constitution.
And that is what has brought them to the courthouse.
And -- and what is the next step how soon will you are have the opportunity to -- through that first threshold.
Once -- administration answers are -- we're likely to have a hearing in front of judge Reggie Walton.
-- we will have it out and one of the first things will be argued.
Is whether in fact the framers after expressly putting in a limitation -- the constitution.
Created a limitation that can never be enforced.
These are very practical man now that's an argument that are sort of -- Often well I would say it will probably take the administration at least a month it should answer.
But we're hoping the court will expedite this matter.
I haven't I'd love our legal system.
-- at least a month one would think there's definitely -- -- in the matter of some dispatch but then again it is as you point out professor of the law.
Jonathan -- always good to talk -- to appreciate.
Thank you -- well.
Filter by section