Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Commander in Chief powers

Read a random definition: Monument

A quick definition of Commander in Chief powers:

The Commander in Chief powers are given to the President by the U.S. Constitution. This means that the President is in charge of the Army, Navy, and Militia when they are called into service. However, there is debate about how much power the President has to use the military without Congress declaring war. In 1973, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution to limit the President's power, but Presidents have often ignored it. After the 9/11 attacks, Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force against Terrorists, which gave the President more power to use the military. This led to the detention of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, which was challenged in court. The Supreme Court ruled that the detainees had the right to challenge their detention in court, and that the President did not have the power to try them in military tribunals. Congress responded by passing the Detainee Treatment Act, which limited the detainees' rights. The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of this act.

A more thorough explanation:

The Commander in Chief powers refer to the authority given to the President of the United States to lead the military forces of the country. According to Article II Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the President is the Commander in Chief of the Army, Navy, and Militia of the United States. However, the extent of the President's powers as Commander in Chief has been a subject of debate throughout American history.

One example of this debate is the War Powers Resolution, which was passed by Congress in 1973 to limit the President's ability to commit U.S. troops to military action without Congressional approval. The resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing troops and to remove them after 60 days if Congress does not grant an extension. However, Presidents have typically considered the resolution to be unconstitutional and have not followed it.

Another example of the Commander in Chief powers is the Authorization for Use of Military Force against Terrorists (AUMF), which was passed by Congress after the September 11 attacks. The AUMF authorized the President to use "all necessary and appropriate force" against those responsible for the attacks. This gave the President more authority to exercise his constitutional powers as Commander in Chief.

However, the use of the Commander in Chief powers has also been controversial, particularly in relation to the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay. The Supreme Court has ruled on several cases related to the detention of prisoners at Guantanamo, including Rasul v. Bush and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. These cases have addressed the extent of the President's powers as Commander in Chief and the rights of detainees under the U.S. Constitution.

Overall, the Commander in Chief powers are an important aspect of the U.S. Constitution and have been the subject of much debate and controversy throughout American history.

command responsibility | commencement of action

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
Congrats1!
21:15
Miami A, yall I'm so excited I could cry.
21:15
Feel like I can finally stop holding my breath!! Whew!!!
[] baddestbunny
22:16
every time I get accosted by a strange man who follows me around because my male coworkers were too busy talking to walk me back to my car I get closer to saying we need to bring back traditional gender roles
Dkk
22:32
Nice! @Macaque
Dkk
22:32
@Aromatic, Have to guess.
Dkk
22:33
That sucks @Bunny do you have to go to the hospital?
[] baddestbunny
22:40
I said accosted not assaulted
23:35
guys. my notre dame address just went long is this good or bad
1a2b3c4d26z
23:37
Oooooo me too
23:37
omg is this good or bad
Dkk
23:47
Idk if gender roles are gunna fix that then.
23:49
it looks like most people who applied in october last cycle didn't get a decision until january... does it even mean anything that our addresses went long??
hows ED 2 compared to ED 1?
Dkk
0:10
No idea
windyMagician
0:34
reporting live to say my ndls address also went long
does it mean anything ^
Dkk
2:21
NDLS and Fordham took a very long time last year. It's good info for people to know.
[] baddestbunny
4:29
let’s get after it boys and girls
Dkk
5:21
I gtg to bed soon.
Dkk
5:22
Big day today. Gunna be a crazy one. I will sleep through the first half.
good morning lsd it is 5 am EST
also jazzy my ndls address went long ages ago i sadly do not think it means anything
my stanford address also went long LOL i think at most it's an indicator it's under review
WorthlessAttractiveZombie
7:44
My berkeley paragraph finally disappeared. I definitely think it is just an indicator that they are actively reviewing files, and does not mean anything about A, WL, or Rs
WorthlessAttractiveZombie
7:46
Also has anyone's date disappeared for W&L? Mine did last night
7:55
@WorthlessAttractiveZombie: mine did yesterday morning
7:56
Oops sorry I meant Vilanova. Mine disappeared last week
soapy
8:48
UMN under review! As predicted, decisions are gonna come out early December
Minus those random R decisions from UMN yesterday though right? I wonder what happened there. I don’t think I’ve seen a school start the season out with anything but As on here
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.