White House Response Paper on AUMF Reauthorization
Politico's Josh Gerstein is reporting:
A move by House Republicans to reauthorize the war on terror is unwise because it could foster perceptions that the U.S.
Published by The Lawfare Institute
in Cooperation With
Politico's Josh Gerstein is reporting:
A move by House Republicans to reauthorize the war on terror is unwise because it could foster perceptions that the U.S. is in an endless war with Al Qaeda, the Taliban and similar groups, the White House argues in a legislative position paper obtained by POLITICO. The aggressively-worded White House memorandum circulated on Capitol Hill blasts a defense bill backed by the House GOP as an unprecedented effort to “micromanage” the handling of war on terror captives and argues the measure would harm national security.I will post thoughts on the White House document after I have had a chance to digest it.“Never before has the Congress sought to so limit and micromanage the military and other elements of our national security community in matters as basic as a detainee transfer; congressional limits like these are a misguided setback to national security, because they take away options to address a continuing and evolving threat,” the White House said in the paper.
The seven-page memorandum expands on the veto threat the White House issued last month regarding aspects of the FY2012 National Defense Authorization Act. The bill passed the House, 322-96, on May 26. Most of the detainee and war on terror provisions were crafted by House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.). However, the bill became even more assertive on the House floor, after an amendment was adopted by Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) aimed at requiring all terrorism suspects to be tried in military tribunals.
Benjamin Wittes is editor in chief of Lawfare and a Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution. He is the author of several books.