An Army Captain Takes Obama to Court Over ISIS Fight

[Nuclear Unicorn]

An Army Captain Takes Obama to Court Over ISIS Fight

WASHINGTON — A 28-year-old army officer on Wednesday sued President Obama over the legality of the war against the Islamic State, setting up a test of Mr. Obama’s disputed claim that he needs no new legal authority from Congress to order the military to wage that deepening conflict.

The plaintiff, Capt. Nathan Michael Smith, an intelligence officer stationed in Kuwait, voiced strong support for fighting the Islamic State but, citing his “conscience” and his vow to uphold the Constitution, he said he believed that the conflict lacked proper authorization from Congress.

“To honor my oath, I am asking the court to tell the president that he must get proper authority from Congress, under the War Powers Resolution, to wage the war against ISIS in Iraq and Syria,” he wrote.

The legal challenge comes after the death of the third American service member fighting the Islamic State and as Mr. Obama has decided to significantly expand the number of Special Operations ground troops he has deployed to Syria aid rebels there.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/05/us/islamic-state-war-powers-lawsuit-obama.html?_r=0

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

1. I salute this officer, and take the opportuity to list The Army Values

Loyalty
Bear true faith and allegiance to the U.S. constitution, the Army, and other soldiers.
Be loyal to the nation and its heritage.

Duty
Fulfill your obligations.
Accept responsibility for your own actions and those entrusted to your care.
Find opportunities to improve oneself for the good of the group.

Respect
Rely upon the golden rule.
How we consider others reflects upon each of us, both personally and as a professional organization.

Selfless Service
Put the welfare of the nation, the Army, and your subordinates before your own.
Selfless service leads to organizational teamwork and encompasses discipline, self-control and faith in the system.

Honor
Live up to all the Army values

Integrity
Do what is right, legally and morally.
Be willing to do what is right even when no one is looking.
It is our "moral compass" an inner voice.

Personal Courage
Our ability to face fear, danger, or adversity, both physical and moral courage.

[Nitram]

3. Suing the Commander in Chief? Is that the way the military works?

I thought there was a chain of command or some such thing. Sounds very un-military code of justice to me.

[former9thward]

19. Commander in Chief is not Dictator in Chief.

The CIC must give lawful orders. Having said that I have no faith that our court system will recognize the illegality of our endless wars in the Middle East.

[Katashi_itto]

26. CIC can only give lawful orders.

[4139]

2. Yep

[Wounded Bear]

4. Mixed emotions on this one for me...

I don't believe in soldiers suing their CiC.

IMHO he really needs to direct his suit against the Congress, who dropped the ball on this one by ignoring administration requests for some kind of legislation, or at least a declaration of some kind, supporting some kind of action. Instead, they wanted to block any action, and then blame Obama for "not doing anything to stem the terrorist menace."

Yeah, politics sucks when it affects military strategy and national security. I'm not so sure Obama is on the 'wrong side' of this issue.

[politicaljunkie41910]

8. Exactly, Congress is the one who dropped the ball on this one.

Obama has asked for the Congress to provide a resolution and thus far they have declined. Others members have made the claim that the POTUS doesn't need one and can just piggyback off the Iraq War resolution. I think this is wroscng on so many levels and it just shows how disfunctional this nation has become if members of the Military can now sue the President, and I say this as a Army Vet myself.

[lpbk2713]

5. Is Limbaugh still on Armed Forces Radio?

Oh I dunno. Just thought I'd ask.

[COLGATE4]

6. And he has standing how?

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

7. It's not a military/chain of command problem that he has....

...it's a constitutional one.

[COLGATE4]

10. I don't see how he has any legal standing to bring suit.

My guess is that it'll be thrown out.

[rockfordfile]

17. That would be my thought

[lame54]

9. Is he suggesting we don't fight ISIS?...

because, regardless of the news reports, we are making progress

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. 2nd paragraph --

The plaintiff, Capt. Nathan Michael Smith, an intelligence officer stationed in Kuwait, voiced strong support for fighting the Islamic State

[lame54]

12. then what the fuck is his problem...

he wants to fight them but not until our do nothing congress who hates and counters our president at every turn approves it

meanwhile ISIS will just deteriorate all on their own - great strategy

I say go Obama - don't wait for the fools

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

13. Very nice.

Great command of Constitutional law.

The oath of office swears allegiance to the Constitution - the Constitution takes precedence over the chain of command.

Without a declaration of war - de minimus an authorization of use of force - the president is acting unilaterally.

[lame54]

21. as opposed to NOT acting at all...

This congress is useless

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

23. Can't....

....take the law into his own hands.

[atreides1]

33. Some info

Some info on the AUMF, S.J. Resolution 29

From two news sources.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/26/senate-lobs-islamic-state-war-authority-back-obama-seeking-fewer-limits/79353428/

http://www.infowars.com/video-senator-warns-aumf-bill-is-declaration-of-international-martial-law/

[beevul]

29. Thats the "do something even if its wrong" school of thought. N/T

[Nuclear Unicorn]

14. I don't think it's a soldier's place to sue the CinC but the CinC should get Congress on board.

If we're willing to consign the War Powers Resolution to the dustbin then we should say as much publicly but if we believe keeping the WPR is the proper thing to do we should not be setting precedence for Presidents to send troops into combat in complete disregard of the Constitution and the law.

If President Obama were to request an AUMF and Congress demurs or simply fails to vote then the consequences are theirs and theirs alone. We, however, will be to blame if a president Trump sends troops to war without bothering to even ask.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

15. He (the officer) may know something we don't know.

From what I know, the build up in Iraq is not brand new. He most likely knows a lot more than I do.

Boots on the ground = clock starts ticking.

ISIS (new enemy) = WPA needed to sustain troops over 60 days

The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war

[lame54]

22. the consequences would be everybody's..

In the form of ISIS attacks

[Nuclear Unicorn]

25. If the President has a case to make he should do so publicly.

Committing troops to combat with complete disregard of the WPR makes the president lawless and that is more of the threat to the nation than ISIS.

[Blue_Tires]

16. Shouldn't he be suing congress?

Last edited Thu May 5, 2016, 03:05 PM - Edit history (1)

Since they're the ones who punted on the issue and essentially told Obama to work it out himself?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

18. Congress cannot order troops.

[Blue_Tires]

24. But congress could have stopped everything up

by holding some other project or initiative for ransom until Obama got their approval...

I mean, it's not like they haven't done this for much lesser things...

But it's moot anyway -- This lawsuit is more symbolic than anything else... Hell, our former nutbar attorney general tried to sue Obama multiple times...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

27. Congress hasn't stopped him because the GOP is happy to see the War Powers Resolution killed off

by a Democratic president. They have never liked the WPR and Obama is giving them what they could never gain on their own.

What will we say when the next GOP president does what Obama is doing?

[Blue_Tires]

28. How could the next GOP president do the same thing if the WPR gets repealed

and replaced with something stronger?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

30. Who's going to repeal and replace it with something stronger?

It's not like the Democratic party is clamoring to put an end to this sort of thing.

[Blue_Tires]

31. Tim Kaine doesn't count?

https://www.military1.com/army/article/457786-senators-unveil-bill-to-change-war-powers/

[Nuclear Unicorn]

32. 1 down, 278 to go

[bluedigger]

20. Seems like a good suit.

I'm always in favor of all due process in the pursuit of foreign military entanglements, whether my guy is in charge, or their guy is. We have been putting too much power to wage war in the hands of the executive branch for decades now.