Rutgers Prof, N.J. peace group challenge constitutionality of Iraq invasion: New Jersey Progressive Organizers Network

Home » News »

Rutgers Prof, N.J. peace group challenge constitutionality of Iraq invasion

Posted on Apr 22, 2009 by New Jersey Peace Action

Tell A Friend Share

Tell A Friend

To Name*
To Email*
From Name*
From Email*
Message*	Rutgers Law professor, N.J. peace group challenge constitutionality of Iraq invasion [small]by Joe Ryan [i]The Star-Ledger[/i][/small] A Rutgers University law professor argued in federal court in Newark today, on behalf of a New Jersey peace group, that President Bush violated the U.S. Constitution's initial intent when he ordered the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Frank Askin, founder of the constitutional litigation clinic at the Rutgers School of Law in Newark, said the framers clearly gave Congress -- not the president -- authority to declare war. When lawyers and judges cite the original intent of the framers of the Constitution, they're often marshaling conservative arguments. And Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, noted for his right-leaning views, is a leading figure in the stick-to-the-original-text school of jurisprudence. But conservatives don't hold a monopoly on the theory. Afterward, Askin even mentioned Scalia might take an interest in the arguments in the case. "We think Scalia is going to love this case. It's all about the initial intent of the founders," said Askin, who argued the suit for the group New Jersey Peace Action. Tuesday April 21, 2009, 7:45 PM [img]http://blog.nj.com/ledgerupdates_impact/2009/04/small_frank%20askin.JPG[/img][i]Frank Askin, Director of the Constitutional Litigation Clinic at Rutgers Law School in Newark. Askin today in federal court argued that the 2003 Iraq invasion was unconstitutional.[/i] During today's hearing, a Justice Department attorney asked U.S. District Judge Jose Linares to dismiss the suit, which seeks to have the war in Iraq declared unconstitutional. The government lawyer, Jeffrey Smith, argued Congress debated vigorously before giving Bush authorization in 2002 to deploy troops. The invasion began six months later. "It's clear that Congress was participating in the decision," Smith said. But Askin and fellow lawyer Bennet Zurofsky said Bush needed a formal declaration of war to send troops into a sovereign nation. The suit, filed in May, does not call for the U.S. to withdraw troops from Iraq. Instead, it seeks to ensure future presidents do not impinge on Congress' sole authority to declare war, Askin said. "That power was delegated by the Founders to Congress and Congress alone," Askin said. The suit was also filed on behalf of two women whose sons served in Iraq: Paula Rogovin, of Teaneck, and Anna Berlinrut, of South Orange. Linares said he would decide "quickly" whether to dismiss the suit. Askin declined to speculate on how the judge would rule. But ultimately, he predicted the case would wind up before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals -- one judicial step away from Scalia himself.
CAPTCHA*	Enter the sum: 4 + 15 = (What is this?)

Rutgers Law professor, N.J. peace group challenge constitutionality of Iraq invasion
by Joe Ryan The Star-Ledger

A Rutgers University law professor argued in federal court in Newark today, on behalf of a New Jersey peace group, that President Bush violated the U.S. Constitution's initial intent when he ordered the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Frank Askin, founder of the constitutional litigation clinic at the Rutgers School of Law in Newark, said the framers clearly gave Congress -- not the president -- authority to declare war.
When lawyers and judges cite the original intent of the framers of the Constitution, they're often marshaling conservative arguments. And Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, noted for his right-leaning views, is a leading figure in the stick-to-the-original-text school of jurisprudence.
But conservatives don't hold a monopoly on the theory. Afterward, Askin even mentioned Scalia might take an interest in the arguments in the case.
"We think Scalia is going to love this case. It's all about the initial intent of the founders," said Askin, who argued the suit for the group New Jersey Peace Action.
Tuesday April 21, 2009, 7:45 PM

Frank Askin, Director of the Constitutional Litigation Clinic at Rutgers Law School in Newark. Askin today in federal court argued that the 2003 Iraq invasion was unconstitutional.
During today's hearing, a Justice Department attorney asked U.S. District Judge Jose Linares to dismiss the suit, which seeks to have the war in Iraq declared unconstitutional.
The government lawyer, Jeffrey Smith, argued Congress debated vigorously before giving Bush authorization in 2002 to deploy troops. The invasion began six months later. "It's clear that Congress was participating in the decision," Smith said.
But Askin and fellow lawyer Bennet Zurofsky said Bush needed a formal declaration of war to send troops into a sovereign nation.
The suit, filed in May, does not call for the U.S. to withdraw troops from Iraq. Instead, it seeks to ensure future presidents do not impinge on Congress' sole authority to declare war, Askin said. "That power was delegated by the Founders to Congress and Congress alone," Askin said.
The suit was also filed on behalf of two women whose sons served in Iraq: Paula Rogovin, of Teaneck, and Anna Berlinrut, of South Orange.
Linares said he would decide "quickly" whether to dismiss the suit.
Askin declined to speculate on how the judge would rule. But ultimately, he predicted the case would wind up before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals -- one judicial step away from Scalia himself.