Well. @realDonaldTrump just announced missile strikes against Syria for the chemical weapons attacks against its own citizens.
First, Bashar al-Assad has committed grave crimes against humanity. The world must come together to confront his horrific butchering of children and civilians. Bashar al-Assad also attacked his people a year ago.
The @realdonaldtrump administration never gave the American people its account for the legal basis for its attacks on Syria. So we filed a FOIA to find the document. And then we sued. We found that a document exists. protectdemocracy.org/syria-lawsuit/
But the administration won't share it. Even when @timkaine asked for it. nbcnews.com/politics/donal…
Yesterday @timkaine asked for that justification again and Mike Pompeo promised to give it. washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-hou…
Are these attacks legal? @stevennelson10 interviewed scholars. They said no. washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-hou…
And @RandPaul said they weren't legal either.
said "If that response is going to include military force, the president of the United States should come to Congress and ask for authorization before military force is used"
and @oonahathaway said "Bottom line: If you support the coming air strike in Syria, you are supporting a rationale that allows the president to use air power unilaterally basically whenever he sees fit." justsecurity.org/54698/downside…
Tonight, 88 bipartisan members of the House said that this strike would violate separation of powers without Congressional authorization, via @jbendery
huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-mi…
huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-mi…
Not only has this Administration not gone to Congress for authority, but it has defied Congress’ requests to even share its view of its authority.
It has repeatedly refused to provide its legal rationale to Congress when Members asked for it based on last April’s strikes nbcnews.com/politics/donal…
Congress even instituted a legal obligation for the Administration to report on its strategy for Syria, including its legal authorities, which is months overdue from the deadline in the National Defense Authorization Act. lawfareblog.com/how-congress-s…
Mattis was asked about the legal basis. He cited just Article II. "every reason to defend vital American interests and that is what he did tonight."
Is there a role for our Congress on this?
Is there a role for our Congress on this?
More context on Mattis's Article II legal justification.
As @jacklgoldsmith and @oonahathaway said: Bottom line: If you support the coming airstrike in Syria, you are supporting a rationale that allows the president to use air power unilaterally basically whenever he sees fit.
lawfareblog.com/downsides-bomb…
lawfareblog.com/downsides-bomb…
