The Act requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of introducing the U.S. into imminent or ongoing "hostilities". It also requires him to end operations within 60 to 90 days unless Congress gives him the authority to continue, or extends the deadline. In the Libya case, the 90-day period will end Sunday.
Until now, every president, beginning with Nixon himself, has argued that the Act is unconstitutional because it infringes on the president’s authority as "Commander-in-Chief". At the same time, however, they have been careful to comply with the Act’s notice requirement - as Obama did two days after deploying U.S. forces over Libya.
At other times, presidents either received authorisation to take military action, as George W. Bush did in 2002 before invading Iraq several months later, or construed the appropriation of money by Congress for purposes of conducting operations as an implicit authorisation, as Bill Clinton did in the case of the 1999 Kosovo War.
When specific authorisation was not forthcoming - as when Ronald Reagan sent military advisers to El Salvador in 1982, when U.S. naval vessels provided served as escorts for Kuwaiti oil tankers during the Iran-Iraq War, or, most recently, during the Kosovo War against Serbia - lawmakers sued the government to enforce the Act’s terms.
In each case, however, the courts ducked the issue on procedural, rather than constitutional grounds, which is likely to be the fate of a new lawsuit filed this week by a bipartisan group of ten congressmen - led by Democrat Dennis Kucinich and Republican Walter Jones - asking the courts to force Obama to withdraw U.S. military forces from the Libyan operation because he did not comply with the Act.
The above quote shows clearly that President Obama is doing the same thing that every president for the last 40 years has done. He followed the requirement of the War Powers Act to notify Congress within 48 hours. He has been waiting for Congress to authorize continuation. Despite having nearly THREE MONTHS to vote on the matter, they have failed to do so. It's not up to him to force them to vote, it's up to them to do their fucking jobs. Especially if they really are that outraged, you would think they could find time to hold the vote. That they can fail to hold the vote and then attack POTUS is ridiculous and disgusting.
They need to just hold the damn vote. If they want the mission in Libya to continue, they should vote to continue authorization. If they want the U.S. to end its role, they should vote to deny authorization. Why the hell are some members of Congress (including some moronic Democrats like Dennis Kucinich) filing suit instead of doing the obvious thing and holding a vote? Why is no one pointing out how absurd and ludicrous this is?
What's even more stupid is that the entire linked article fails to even once discuss the law as it applies to U.N. resolutions and this is a case where the U.S. is providing support to military operations ordered and authorized by the U.N. Many have argued convincingly[1] that Congress does not need to provide authorization through the War Powers Act in such a case. Whether or not one accepts this argument, Congress appears to be trying to wreck a U.N. authorized military operation because they can't get their act together! Many Republicans hate the U.N. so maybe they want to do this, but why are Democrats going along and promoting false GOP narratives? Talk about an epic failure.
And there's still more stupidity. The whole discussion about Libya makes it sound like the U.S.A.F. is out there bombing Libya by itself with no authorization. In fact, the U.S. got out of bombing and handed command to NATO over two months ago! This is the point the White House is trying to make, that the U.S. isn't even actively involved in combat (the linked article critiques this claim but I don't find their view entirely convincing[2]). But people on both the right and the left are trying to depict this as "Obama's illegal war" for some bizarre reason, reality be damned.
Because of the U.N. resolution, and because the U.S. isn't actually engaged in combat, I don't feel that Congress needs to authorize it further. But since many members of Congress clearly do feel this - then HOLD THE DAMN VOTE!!
Also, liberals, please stop bleating "I agree that Obama should have gone to Congress". He did. Congress failed to do their part by voting. Why are we letting the GOP entangle POTUS in this web of deceit and stupidity and not defending him and pointing out reality?
[1] http://jenkinsear.com/2011/03/19/a-legal-war-the-united-nations-participation...
[2] For a good legal defense of this interpretation of "hostilities", see http://roadkillrefugee.posterous.com/obamas-decision-on-war-powers-and-libya-...