Federal judge hears challenge to Iraq war

[sabra]

Source: AP

NEWARK, N.J. – Opponents of the Iraq war say former President George W. Bush overstepped his authority when the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003.

A veteran and two mothers of soldiers are trying to get the war declared unconstitutional. Their attorneys made arguments Tuesday in federal court in Newark, N.J.

They cited Justice Antonin Scalia's strict interpretation of the Constitution in a decision last year that affirmed the right of homeowners to own guns for self-defense.

They argued that Bush overstepped his constitutional authority to invade Iraq without Congress officially declaring war. They say that wasn't the intent of the Founding Fathers.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090421/ap_on_re_us/us_iraq_war_hearing_1

[SpiralHawk]

1. "The Constitution is just a God Damn piece of paper" (smirk) - xCommander AWOL (R)

"It (the US Constitution) is just a God damn piece of paper"*

* actual quote from Commander AWOL Bush
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml

[tritsofme]

7. Oh come on.

It wouldn't surprise me if Bush felt that way, but that website is garbage.

[AZ Criminal JD]

2. These exact same arguments were used in Vietnam War cases.

They went nowhere. Courts tossed all the cases.

[Ian David]

3. Of course Bush overstepped his authority. He was never even elected President. Geesh. n/t

[Winterblues]

4. That is exactly why Bush* got Congress to vote on IWR

And many Democrats voted for it....Bush* is off the hook on that charge but if it is determined he lied and created false intelligence then all bets are off.

[stevenleser]

5. The Weapons Inspectors Reports of March 6, 2003 are the wildcard in this

As I wrote here---> http://www.opednews.com/articles/Iraq-War--Six-Year-Annive-by-Steven-Leser-090304-145.html

if the Joint Resolution to Authorize force was to use force only to enforce UN Resolutions, and the UN Weapons inspectors on the ground could not find a material breach of those Resolutions, then Presidential authority was exceeded no matter how you try to slice and dice it.

[Wizard777]

6. Not only that this actually could have been better handled by a Letter of Marque and Reprisal.

That could have authorized the military or even a privateer like Blackwater to go to Iraq. Find the WMD's and destroy them.

[kpete]

8. Federal judge hears challenge to Iraq war

Source: Associated Press

Apr 21, 4:13 PM EDT


Federal judge hears challenge to Iraq war

By DAVID PORTER
Associated Press Writer


NEWARK, N.J. (AP) -- Opponents of the Iraq war are leaning on an unlikely source to bolster their efforts to declare the invasion unconstitutional: Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

In arguments Tuesday in federal court in Newark, attorneys for an Iraq war veteran and two New Jersey mothers of soldiers cited the conservative justice.

............................

"It's all about the original intent of the founders," said Frank Askin, a law professor at Rutgers University-Newark who argued for the plaintiffs.

The lawsuit filed last May claims that, despite being authorized by Congress in fall 2002 to deploy armed forces against Iraq as he deemed necessary, President George W. Bush overstepped his constitutional authority by invading the country six months later without formally declaring war.



Read more: http://herald-zeitung.com/wire.lasso?report=/dynamic/stories/U/US_IRAQ_WAR_HEARING&-session=HeraldZeitung:42F949F70a47d2611CLtP3E120E0

[IndianaGreen]

9. Scalia believed in states' rights, until Bush v. Gore

Conservatives have no principles other than what is in their own interests.

[AZ Criminal JD]

12. What does states' rights have to do with the Iraq war?

[No Elephants]

13. The point seems to be that Scalia's politics influence his conduct on the bench.

[IndianaGreen]

15. Exactly! Scalia claims to follow a judicial philosophy, but Bush v. Gore went counter to it

The plaintiffs are hoping that Scalia will rule that barring a Congressional Declaration of War, the President cannot commit troops to combat. While this is a sensible and solid judicial argument, Scalia won't buy it. Scalia's record is one of abandoning self-proclaimed "strict constructionist" principles (whatever that means) whenever political expediency dictates otherwise. This is what happened when Scalia intervened in what had been a Florida election question in order to throw the election to Bush.

Scalia has also given speeches in which he has stated his support for a unitary executive, a President having the powers of an absolute monarch in times of war, declared or undeclared. Of course, Scalia said these things during Bush's Presidency. I doubt that today he would adhere to those views now that Obama is President.

[Demeter]

10. Lots of Luck with That

It hasn't worked since 1945.

[24601]

11. Actually, WWII was from 1941 through 1952

The fighting may have stopped, but congress didn't declare the end of the war for another 6 1/2 years

[No Elephants]

14. They are looking forward. They want to set a precedent so that the Constitution will be

followed in the future. The D of J wants the suit dismissed, claiming that, when the President and the Congress agree, courts have nothing to say about it. So much for three co-equal branches of government, each serving as a check and balance with respect to the others.


"The suit does not seek to influence current policy in Iraq but instead aims to set a precedent for future conflicts.

Tuesday's arguments in front of U.S. District Judge Jose L. Linares were in response to the U.S. government's motion to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that the courts do not have jurisdiction to rule on what is essentially a political matter.

"What you had was a cooperative action between two political branches that is not subject to judicial intervention," Justice Department attorney Jeffrey Smith argued."