SCOTUS, Standing, Political Questions and Iraq
How can the Iraq Debacle be ended? Some say only after the 2008 election:
Matt Stoller makes it explicit:My strategic end goal is to end the war. To do that involves a process of showing that the Democratic caucus is unified behind putting restrictions on Bush and his ability to fight the war, and then using that pressure to remove Republicans (and wayward Democrats) from office in 2008.
Some think that the House Iraq supplemental funding can lead to a confrontation with the President in the Supreme Court:
If [Bush] ignores [the House proposal], we sue and the courts enforce it. if he ignores that, we're in massive constitutional crisis.
Gov. Bill Richardson thinks deauthorizing the Debacle and invoking the War Powers Act can lead to a Supreme Court resolution:
the Congress authorized the war and the Congress should deauthorize the war. Then, there will be a legal fight - the administration will say "well, we don't recognize the war powers act." Then you go to the Supreme Court.
Are any of these options realistic? Or acceptable? Waiting for the next election could work but it is morally unacceptable and, imo, not likely to work. As for counting on the Supreme Court, assuming a bill could be enacted, issues of standing and the political question doctrine preclude these avenues. The reality is, as it always has been, the Congress' power to end the Debacle lies in the Spending Power.
|< David Broder Speaks For Carl Levin and Barack Obama | Now 94 and Harmless, Why Is He Still in Jail? >|