3 ms·
> "The powers to declare and wage war, to conclude peace, to make treaties, to maintain diplomatic relations with other sovereignties, if they had never been me
by jimktrains2 12y ago
> "The powers to declare and wage war, to conclude peace, to make treaties, to maintain diplomatic relations with other sovereignties, if they had never been mentioned in the Constitution, would have vested in the federal government as necessary concomitants of nationality"
And the Constitution only mentions these to prevent member-states from partaking in these actions of their own accord. A 1936 ruling is a generation after the Civil War, so there is a predominate interpretation of who was actually a sovereign at the time, right?
I'm not arguing with you, I just find the topic interesting to say (basically) "we can do this because we're a country" when that hasn't always been the end-all-be-all of it.
- dragonwriter 12y ago> And the Constitution only mentions these to prevent member-states from partaking in these actions of their own accord. No, the Constitution mentions them to assign what agents of the government have the power to do them, and the conditions on the exercise and the interrelations between those powers and other powers. Note that, pieces of the powers related to war, peace, and foreign relations are assigned to different entities in the Constitution (some to the Congress, some to the President, and some to the Judiciary.)