Search results for ""Author John Yoo""

Since the September 11 attacks on the United States, the Bush administration has come under fire for its methods of combating terrorism. Waging war against al Qaeda has proven to be a legal quagmire, with critics claiming that the administration's response in Afghanistan and Iraq is unconstitutional. The war on terror—and, in a larger sense, the administration's decision to withdraw from the ABM Treaty and the Kyoto accords—has many wondering whether the constitutional framework for making foreign affairs decisions has been discarded by the present administration. John Yoo, formerly a lawyer in the Department of Justice, here makes the case for a completely new approach to understanding what the Constitution says about foreign affairs, particularly the powers of war and peace. Looking to American history, Yoo points out that from Truman and Korea to Clinton's intervention in Kosovo, American presidents have had to act decisively on the world stage without a declaration of war. They are able to do so, Yoo argues, because the Constitution grants the president, Congress, and the courts very different powers, requiring them to negotiate the country's foreign policy. Yoo roots his controversial analysis in a brilliant reconstruction of the original understanding of the foreign affairs power and supplements it with arguments based on constitutional text, structure, and history. Accessibly blending historical arguments with current policy debates, The Powers of War and Peace will no doubt be hotly debated. And while the questions it addresses are as old and fundamental as the Constitution itself, America's response to the September 11 attacks has renewed them with even greater force and urgency.“Can the president of the United States do whatever he likes in wartime without oversight from Congress or the courts? This year, the issue came to a head as the Bush administration struggled to maintain its aggressive approach to the detention and interrogation of suspected enemy combatants in the war on terrorism. But this was also the year that the administration’s claims about presidential supremacy received their most sustained intellectual defense [in] The Powers of War and Peace.”—Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times “Yoo’s theory promotes frank discussion of the national interest and makes it harder for politicians to parade policy conflicts as constitutional crises. Most important, Yoo’s approach offers a way to renew our political system’s democratic vigor.”—David B. Rivkin Jr. and Carlos Ramos-Mrosovsky, National Review

Read more less

After the September 11, 2001 attacks, the United States went to war. With thousands of Americans killed, billions of dollars in damage, and aggressive military and security measures in response, we are still living with the war a decade later. A change of presidential administration has not dulled controversy over the most fundamental objectives, strategies, and tactics of the war, or whether it is even a war at all. Confronting Terror sets the stage for a reasoned and robust discussion of the future with a collection of new essays examining the meaning of 9/11 and the law and policy of the war on terrorism. The contributors include principled supporters and critics of the war on terrorism alike, from former Attorneys General John Ashcroft and Michael Mukasey to Alan Dershowitz and former long-time president of the ACLU Nadine Strossen. Confronting Terror presents stark differences of opinion on issues, such as the president's authority to detain, the assertion of state secrets, the limits of surveillance, the use of unmanned drones and targeted killing, the treatment and interrogation of detainees, the Patriot Act, and the peculiar nature of our foe. More surprising, perhaps, are the areas of agreement, particularly the fact that the policies of two very different presidents are remarkably the same. In surveying these views, Yoo and Reuter hope to clarify the debate, both for our society and for those responsible for waging the war. Contributors include John D. Ashcroft, Bob Barr, Michael Chertoff, Alan Dershowitz, Viet D. Dinh, Richard Epstein, Victor Davis Hanson, Arthur Herman, Charles Kesler, Andrew C. McCarthy, Edwin Meese III, Michael B. Mukasey, Theodore B. Olson, A. Raymond Randolph, Dean Reuter, Anthony D. Romero, Paul Rosenzweig, Laurence Silberman, Nadine Strossen, Marc Thiessen, Jonathan Turley, and John C. Yoo.

Read more less

If there has been a unifying theme of Barack Obama's presidency, it is the inexorable growth of the administrative state. Its expansion has followed a pattern: First, expand federal powers beyond their constitutional limits. Second, delegate those powers to agencies and away from elected politicians in Congress. Third, insulate civil servants from politics and accountability. Since its introduction in American life by Woodrow Wilson in the 20th Century, the administrative state's has steadily undermined democratic self-government, reduced the sphere of individual liberty, and burdened the free market and economic growth. In Liberty's Nemesis, Dean Reuter and John Yoo collect the brightest political minds in the country to expose this explosive, unchecked growth of power in government agencies ranging from health care to climate change, financial markets to immigration, and more. Many Americans have rightly shared the Founders' fear of excessive lawmaking, but Liberty's Nemesis is the first book to explain why the concentration of power in administrative agencies in particular is the greatest -- and most overlooked -- threat to our liberties today. If we fail to curb it, our constitutional republic might easily devolve into something akin to the statist governments of Europe. President Obama's ongoing efforts to encourage just such a devolution, and the problems his administration faces as a consequence, present a critical opportunity to defend the original vision of the Constitution.

Read more less