US War Powers: A Suggestion, Not a Law, for Some Presidents
The mainstream media covers Trump's assertion that the War Powers Act is unconstitutional, following US military action in Venezuela. This isn't a novel stance; every president since Nixon has, in practice, treated the Act as largely optional, selectively ignoring its constraints to launch military operations from Libya to Syria. The Act's core purpose—requiring congressional approval for extended
military engagements—has been systematically sidestepped by administrations citing executive prerogative, essentially rendering it a 'suggestion' rather than law. One might wonder if the Act's 'unconstitutionality' only arises when it inconvenience presidential adventurism. The irony is, the Act was passed precisely to reassert Congress's constitutional power to declare war, a power frequently
usurped. Instead, we have a revolving door of presidents who decide when the Constitution applies to their military excursions. (Presumably, if Congress ever tried to declare peace, that would be unconstitutional.)