So, does this imply that once Congress gives authority to invade a country, the President can do it repeatedly? http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/18/politics/us-iraq/ …
@ExeteraAdams But at that point it's just a remand for rewrite. Like, they'd just tack "or we will disband the army" onto the end. Done.
-
-
@ExeteraAdams So, like, _maybe_ the Supreme Court would want them to do that, but I seriously doubt it.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@cmuratori But the problem is that Congress doesn't _want_ to disband or defund the army, because it would be a political non-starter. -
@ExeteraAdams That's a good point, it would give the executive some more leverage. I mean, if he bothered following it in the first place :P
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@cmuratori You've seen the way Congress will play hot potato with defense authorizations bills... no one wants to be seen saying "no" to it.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@cmuratori Besides, separation of powers is tricky stuff, and the Court might not let that pass either. I don't expect it, but... (1/2)Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@cmuratori ... after that ridiculous decision about opting out of Medicare expansion, I wouldn't be too surprised if they limit it further.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@cmuratori (The decision establishes that the Court doesn't like Congress coercing its way to powers it doesn't have with powers it does.)Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.