The
Troops Don’t Support the Constitution
by
Jacob G. Hornberger
by Jacob G. Hornberger
Every
U.S. soldier takes an express and solemn oath to support and
defend the Constitution. That oath, however, is a sham because
the troops do not support or defend the Constitution. Instead, when
it comes to war the troops follow another oath they take
to obey the orders of the president, and they do this without regard
to whether such orders violate the Constitution.
A textbook example involves President Bushs war on Iraq.
The Constitution prohibits the president from waging war without
first securing a declaration of war from Congress. By waging war
on Iraq without the constitutionally required congressional declaration
of war, the president violated the Constitution.
Some people pooh-pooh the violation, perceiving the Constitution
as simply a technical document that can be violated whenever the
president feels that national security or even
the welfare of foreigners necessitates it.
Some also make the claim that when Congress delegated its power
to declare war on Iraq to the president (on the eve of the 2002
congressional elections), that delegation served as an adequate
substitute for an actual declaration of war on Iraq.
They are wrong.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land that we the people
of the United States have imposed on our federal officials. Like
it or not, U.S. officials are supposed to comply with its restrictions
on power. If U.S. officials dont like a particular constitutional
provision or if they feel that it is outdated, the proper remedy
is to seek a constitutional amendment, not ignore the provision.
Moreover, the Supreme Court, which is the final arbiter of constitutional
interpretation under our system of government, has long held that
no branch of the federal government can lawfully delegate its constitutional
powers to another branch of government. Only the Congress, not the
president, is authorized to declare war, and without that declaration
the president cannot lawfully wage war on another nation.
We should bear in mind that had the president complied with the
declaration-of-war requirement, the Congress might well have discovered
in the process that the presidents WMD claims were defective.
The Congress might also have concluded that invading a sovereign
and independent country for the purpose of spreading democracy
a war in which tens of thousands of innocent people would
be killed and maimed could not be justified under moral principles.
But
we cant refuse orders of the president. Hes our commander
in chief, say the troops. Its not our job to determine
what is constitutional or not. We deployed to Iraq, like it or not,
because the president ordered us to do so.
Setting aside the moral implications of that position, doesnt
that mindset reflect that the oath that the troops take to support
and defend the Constitution is in fact a sham? The troops know
or should know that the Constitution prohibits the president
from waging war without a congressional declaration of war. They
also know that the Congress never declared war on Iraq. Nevertheless,
they obeyed the presidents orders to attack Iraq.
The presidents war on Iraq reflects why our nations
Founding Fathers opposed
standing armies. Members of a professional army, who have vowed
to obey the orders of the president, are unlikely to say no when
the president orders them to attack another country.
On the other hand, a nation that relies instead on well-trained
citizens (i.e., citizen-soldiers)
to defend itself from a foreign attack would stand in a different
position. Citizen-soldiers, while willing and prepared to rally
to the defense of their own country in the event of an invasion,
would be much less likely to answer the presidents call to
leave their families and give up their jobs to attack a country
thousands of miles away from American shores.
Isnt it ironic that, even as the troops waging war in Iraq
exhort the American people to support them, the troops, by invading
Iraq without the constitutionally required congressional declaration
of war, have failed to support the Constitution?
October
11, 2005
Jacob
Hornberger [send him mail]
is founder and president of The Future
of Freedom Foundation.
Copyright
© 2005 Future of Freedom Foundation
Jacob
Hornberger Archives
|