The ABM Treaty and the Constitution


Book Description




The Powers of War and Peace


Book Description

Since the September 11 attacks on the United States, the Bush administration has come under fire for its methods of combating terrorism. Waging war against al Qaeda has proven to be a legal quagmire, with critics claiming that the administration's response in Afghanistan and Iraq is unconstitutional. The war on terror—and, in a larger sense, the administration's decision to withdraw from the ABM Treaty and the Kyoto accords—has many wondering whether the constitutional framework for making foreign affairs decisions has been discarded by the present administration. John Yoo, formerly a lawyer in the Department of Justice, here makes the case for a completely new approach to understanding what the Constitution says about foreign affairs, particularly the powers of war and peace. Looking to American history, Yoo points out that from Truman and Korea to Clinton's intervention in Kosovo, American presidents have had to act decisively on the world stage without a declaration of war. They are able to do so, Yoo argues, because the Constitution grants the president, Congress, and the courts very different powers, requiring them to negotiate the country's foreign policy. Yoo roots his controversial analysis in a brilliant reconstruction of the original understanding of the foreign affairs power and supplements it with arguments based on constitutional text, structure, and history. Accessibly blending historical arguments with current policy debates, The Powers of War and Peace will no doubt be hotly debated. And while the questions it addresses are as old and fundamental as the Constitution itself, America's response to the September 11 attacks has renewed them with even greater force and urgency. “Can the president of the United States do whatever he likes in wartime without oversight from Congress or the courts? This year, the issue came to a head as the Bush administration struggled to maintain its aggressive approach to the detention and interrogation of suspected enemy combatants in the war on terrorism. But this was also the year that the administration’s claims about presidential supremacy received their most sustained intellectual defense [in] The Powers of War and Peace.”—Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times “Yoo’s theory promotes frank discussion of the national interest and makes it harder for politicians to parade policy conflicts as constitutional crises. Most important, Yoo’s approach offers a way to renew our political system’s democratic vigor.”—David B. Rivkin Jr. and Carlos Ramos-Mrosovsky, National Review










National Missile Defense


Book Description




Constitutional Conflicts Between Congress and the President


Book Description

A classic on the separation of powers, this book dissects the crucial constitutional disputes between the executive and legislative branches from the Constitutional Convention to the present day. New material includes military tribunals and NSA eavesdropping, disputes over executive orders, state secrets privilege, and post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.




Ballistic Missiles


Book Description




The National Law of Treaty Implementation


Book Description

The post-Vietnam era produced a host of constitutional confrontations between the President and the Congress as to their respective authority in foreign affairs. One of the most intense of these concerned the respective powers of the branches in interpretations and implementation of treaties, which was triggered between the Executive and Congress over the meaning of the 1972 U.S.-Soviet Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, which became known as the "broad-narrow" debate. This debate, which ranks among the most complex and contentious legal debates in the history of United States foreign policy, quickly split both the Executive and Congressional branches. In that context, Professor John Norton Moore, the founder of the modern field of National Security Law, was requested by the Director of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency to prepare a study for the Director sorting out the issues and seeking to resolve the legal dispute. Most of the multi-volume, 4000-page study compiled by Professor Moore is still highly classified and has never been released. This volume, however, is an unclassified study presenting the arguments on all sides in the constitutional portion of this great debate. It contains as one Appendix the original Annex D to the multi-volume study summarizing the original Senate consideration of the ABM Treaty as declassified by the Director of ACDA. This book is a must for all serious constitutional scholars having an interest in the respective powers of the Congress and the President in foreign affairs, as well as those interested in the original debate on this issue.




The Political Question Doctrine and the Supreme Court of the United States


Book Description

Historically, the political question doctrine has held the courts from resolving constitutional issues that are better left to other departments of government, as a way of maintaining the system of checks and balances. However, this book discusses the gradual changes in the parameters of the doctrine, including its current position dealing with increasingly extraterritorial concerns.