Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) criticized U.S.-led strikes on Yemen, saying they were “an unacceptable violation of the Constitution.”

“Article 1 requires that military action be authorized by Congress,” Jayapal added in her post on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, late Thursday.

Other Democrats, including Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), also criticized the strikes.

  • ApostleO@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    11 months ago

    While I agree, let’s not pretend that presidents haven’t been launching combat missions without formal declaration of war for decades. Longer than I’ve been alive. It’s one of the biggest expansions of executive power we have allowed, under the guise of “the war on terror”, “the cold war”, or even “the war on drugs”.

    • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      There’s not really any room to agree with her legally; she is categorically wrong. This action falls under previous standing military authorizations that Congress has passed.

      If Congress has an issue with it, they can revoke them at any time. She can say that she thinks it’s wrong and that we shouldn’t have done it, but to say that it’s unconstitutional is just broadcasting an embarrassing lack of knowledge for a sitting member of Congress.

      • ApostleO@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        I guess I meant that those standing authorizations should not exist, as they effectively abdicate a power the Constitution outlined for Congress, transferring it to the President. They erode the checks and balances.

        • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          That’s an argument for Congress revoking it though, not for it being illegal.

          To that end, I mostly do agree actually. It’s not a good idea for the President to have such vast unilateral military powers without prior Congressional oversight, but again, this was all done by Congress to begin with. They can repeal it at any time.

          • ApostleO@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            I’d argue that an unconstitutional law is itself illegal, and thus does not render an unconstitutional action legal. That said, I’m sure I’d lose any argument on the constitutionality of the war power granted by Congress to the President.

            The truth is, our Constitution was written in a time when the world moved much more slowly. It’s unfortunately no longer practical to expect it to work in a world as fast paced as ours is today. We need a full rewrite, but I do not trust anyone to rewrite it.

      • Pohl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Agree, is there some rule that says progressives have to show their whole ass today? Super disappointed. Lying to our faces or woefully underprepared to do the job. Both looks suck. These people are damaging the future of the cause to score some own goals today.

        Fucking shameful showing.