Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
383
result(s) for
"War and emergency powers United States History."
Sort by:
War powers
Armed interventions in Libya, Haiti, Iraq, Vietnam, and Korea challenged the US president and Congress with a core question of constitutional interpretation: does the president, or Congress, have constitutional authority to take the country to war? War Powers argues that the Constitution doesn't offer a single legal answer to that question. But its structure and values indicate a vision of a well-functioning constitutional politics, one that enables the branches of government themselves to generate good answers to this question for the circumstances of their own times.
Mariah Zeisberg shows that what matters is not that the branches enact the same constitutional settlement for all conditions, but instead how well they bring their distinctive governing capacities to bear on their interpretive work in context. Because the branches legitimately approach constitutional questions in different ways, interpretive conflicts between them can sometimes indicate a successful rather than deficient interpretive politics. Zeisberg argues for a set of distinctive constitutional standards for evaluating the branches and their relationship to one another, and she demonstrates how observers and officials can use those standards to evaluate the branches' constitutional politics. With cases ranging from the Mexican War and World War II to the Cold War, Cuban Missile Crisis, and Iran-Contra scandal, War Powers reinterprets central controversies of war powers scholarship and advances a new way of evaluating the constitutional behavior of officials outside of the judiciary.
eBook
Leaders at War
One of the most contentious issues in contemporary foreign policy-especially in the United States-is the use of military force to intervene in the domestic affairs of other states. Some military interventions explicitly try to transform the domestic institutions of the states they target; others do not, instead attempting only to reverse foreign policies or resolve disputes without trying to reshape the internal landscape of the target state. InLeaders at War, Elizabeth N. Saunders provides a framework for understanding when and why great powers seek to transform foreign institutions and societies through military interventions. She highlights a crucial but often-overlooked factor in international relations: the role of individual leaders.
Saunders argues that leaders' threat perceptions-specifically, whether they believe that threats ultimately originate from the internal characteristics of other states-influence both the decision to intervene and the choice of intervention strategy. These perceptions affect the degree to which leaders use intervention to remake the domestic institutions of target states. Using archival and historical sources, Saunders concentrates on U.S. military interventions during the Cold War, focusing on the presidencies of Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson. After demonstrating the importance of leaders in this period, she also explores the theory's applicability to other historical and contemporary settings including the post-Cold War period and the war in Iraq.
eBook
Outside the law : emergency and executive power
The origins of presidential claims to extraconstitutional powers during national crises are contentious points of debate among constitutional and legal scholars. The Constitution is silent on the matter, yet from Abraham Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War to George W. Bush's creation of the \"enemy combatants\" label, a number of presidents have invoked emergency executive power in defense of actions not specifically endorsed in the Constitution or granted by Congress.
Taking up the debate, Clement Fatovic digs into the intellectual history of the nation's founding to argue that the originators of liberal constitutional theory explicitly endorsed the use of extraordinary, extralegal measures to deal with genuine national emergencies. He traces the evolution of thought on the matter through the writings of John Locke, David Hume, William Blackstone, and the founding fathers, finding in them stated support for what Locke termed \"prerogative, \" tempered by a carefully construed concept of public-oriented virtues. Fatovic maintains that the founders believed that moral character and republican decency would restrain the president from abusing this grant of enhanced authority and ensure that it remained temporary.
This engaging, carefully considered survey of the conceptions of executive power in constitutional thought explains how liberalism's founders attempted to reconcile the principles of constitutional government with the fact that some circumstances would demand that an executive take normally proscribed actions. Scholars of liberalism, the American founding, and the American presidency will find Fatovic's reasoned arguments against the conventional wisdom enlightening.
eBook
How America Goes to War
With American involvement in Iraq in the forefront of national news coverage and in the minds of many citizens, questions concerning America's involvement in past conflicts have once again arisen. This is the story of how the United States has gone to war and how the evolution of the nation's war-making apparatus has mirrored the nation's rise to global power. It focuses on the president's role as commander-in-chief vis-a-vis Congress from George Washington to George W. Bush. Conflicts range from the War of 1812 to the Mexican and Civil Wars, the two World Wars, conflicts in Southeast Asia, and recent wars in the Middle East. Topics include Congress's role in various wars, the evolution of the War Department to the Department of Defense, as well as developments in weapons, tactics, and strategy. Wars have played an integral role in America's transformation from a continental power into a world force. Over time, America's war making has favored and continues to favor the expansion of the President's role at the expense of the Congress. America's future will be determined in large part by the way in which the nation chooses and engages in military pursuits. Questions about how and when we go to war have never been so vital or relevant. This thought-provoking one volume overview serves as a quick introduction to these important issues.
eBook
The politics of war powers : the theory and history of Presidential unilateralism
\"Presidential war powers have greatly expanded over the last half-century as presidents increasingly initiate acts of war without the prior authorization of Congress and without facing serious consequences. The breakdown in the system of checks on executive power presents a constitutional problem, which has elicited significant scholarly attention in recent years. Sarah Burns looks to the theoretical roots of the separation of powers system in the writings of Montesquieu for guidance in addressing the current crisis. Montesquieu's complex moderate constitutionalism requires both the executive and legislative branches to make public arguments about war and compete for public approval. His argument for the necessity of the struggle between political branches leads to clearer checks on power and fewer rash military operations. The Politics of War Powers demonstrates the link between Montesquieuan and American government and argues that reintegrating Montesquieu's constitutionalism into American politics will provide a healthier model of interaction and dialogue between the President and Congress\"-- Provided by publisher.
BOOK
