How the Supreme Court may ultimately end the Iraq war

The Democrats' victory in November, coupled with the courage of some Republicans to break ranks with the President, may mark the beginning of the end of the Iraq war.  Pretty soon, the House and Senate will begin debating a non-binding resolution that condemns the Administration's Iraq policy.  If it survives a Senate filibuster, it will mark the first successful effort to slowly chip away at Bush's wartime power.  Little by little, lawmakers will start submitting other bills that go even further to restrict the Administration's ability to continue enacting an open-ended war policy. 

Eventually, likely before the end of the year, this will turn into a constitutional show-down over whether the Legislative Branch has the right to block funds for this war.  Assuming Bush and Cheney continue to fight it, the matter would end up in the Supreme Court.  Although the high court would not be voting precisely on whether to end the war, their decision could end up doing just that.  If the Supreme Court rules that the Legislative Branch does indeed control the power of the purse, even during wartime, then Bush would lose control over how long the war could continue.

Therefore, while 2007 may become a battle between the Legislative and Executive branches over wartime authority, the Judicial Branch will have the ultimate say.  Even more fascinating, all of this would unfold as each presidential contender campaigns for their party's nomination.

Comments

[Skeeter Sanders]

Does the Congress retain exclusive power over the federal purse -- even during wartime?

First of all, Congress never issued a formal declaration of war against Iraq. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress exclusive authority to declare war. And since Congress hasn't issued a declaration of war since 1941, you can't constitutionally call this "wartime," even though it de facto is.

The Supreme Court already settled the question about Congress' power over the federal purse in 1997 when it declared unconstitutional legislation granting President Bill Clinton enhanced authority to veto budget line items. The justices ruled unanimously that the only way to give the president line-item veto authority is through a constitutional amendment.

So yes, Congress DOES have the power to end the Bush administration's war in Iraq -- more specifically, its obscene 24,000 troop buildup -- by denying funds for it.

[Administrator: Todd]

Good analogy, Skeeter. I like your web site by the way. I was also thinking of that line item veto example. But what worries me is that in the post-911 era, as was the case during WWII, the Supreme Court has tended to rule more on the side of the Executive.

But like I wrote, this war will end in a court room.