Thursday, August 29, 2013

(Related Update): Q: Who said this?

Related Update: Hopefully the growing momentum directed at holding Obama accountable to the Constitution will be effective, though I'm doubtful. [ht: instapundit].
More than 100 lawmakers, including 18 Democrats, have signed a letter that says President Obama would violate the Constitution by striking Syria without first getting authorization from Congress.

A total of 116 lawmakers had signed the letter as of 6 p.m. Wednesday, highlighting bipartisan interest and growing momentum in ensuring a role for Congress in any decision to use force in Syria.

“Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution,” states the letter, spearheaded by Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.).

Original Post:  As the US moves us closer to another war, this time with Iraq, er, Syria, ask yourself what prominent politician made this statement:
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation."
A:  Click here for the answer and for a discussion of the broader context of this response.  Note, also, that this is from a major liberal publication.