The resolution — designed to unify lawmakers from both parties and provide Congress a voice on the policy — would curtail unilateral presidential actions. For example, it would give a one-year authorization for US in volvement in the NATO action, and states that the Senate would be opposed to introducing American ground forces in Libya, a stance Obama also holds.
While it has support from Senate leaders of both parties, it’s unclear whether the resolution would halt bipartisan threats in the House to restrict the president’s actions in Libya by withholding funds.
Some legal scholars say the resolution, despite assurances from McCain and Kerry, does not limit the current mission.
“It looks like it was drafted in the State Department. It gives the president everything he would possibly want and imposes no meaningful restrictions,’’ said Michael J. Glennon, a scholar at Tufts University’s Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy who helped lawmakers draft the 1973 War Powers Resolution.
That act, which followed what was perceived as a constitutional power grab by presidents Johnson and Nixon during the Vietnam War, requires presidents to receive congressional approval for military actions within 60 days of initiating hostilities.
With the NATO mission entering its fourth month, some members of Congress — conservatives such as House Speaker John A. Boehner and liberals such as Dennis Kucinich of Ohio and Michael E. Capuano of Somerville — have denounced the administration for not seeking congressional permission under the act.
Late yesterday, Boehner, who has threatened to cut off funding for the mission, said the House will take up two resolutions: one mirroring the Kerry-McCain version and a second that would end most US involvement, although it would permit noncombat roles, such as search and rescue, aerial refueling, and surveillance. House Republicans will discuss the resolutions today, he said.
