The Legal Basis for Military Action against ISIS
Posted
September 25, 2014
Views
742
Likes
8
Engagement
1.08%
September 25, 2014
742
8
1.08%
Every word spoken in this episode is indexed. Type any phrase to jump straight to the moment it was said.
Type any word or phrase that may have been spoken. Click a result to seek the player to that exact moment.
Try a name, a topic, or a quoted line
1:35:29Now PlayingAs the Obama Administration lays out its strategic plan to degrade and destroy the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), some members of Congress assert that the President should – and perhaps must – request an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) specific to ISIS. The President and his advisors have described ISIS as “an extremely dangerous organization,” and the campaign to defeat them may take years. On September 8, the President sent his seventh ISIS-related War Powers Resolution letter to Congress since June, and apparently will not ask Congress for an ISIS-specific AUMF anytime soon. Can or should the administration rely on the 2001 AUMF passed in response to the September 11 attacks to justify sustained military action against ISIS? Might the Iraq-specific AUMF enacted in 2002 provide such authority? Or are the President’s Article II powers alone legally sufficient to justify ongoing and future military operations against ISIS in Iraq and perhaps beyond?
Sentinel Indexing in Progress
Metadata and chapters are available. Claim extraction for this episode is pending.
All video content is delivered via YouTube embedded players in accordance with the YouTube Terms of Service. Sentinel provides research tools that promote discovery and accountability across political media.
