Bartlett joins lawsuit against Obama over Libya
Rep. Roscoe G. Bartlett joined a bipartisan group of lawmakers Wednesday in filing a lawsuit against President Barack Obama over U.S. involvement in Libya, alleging that the White House overstepped its constitutional authority when it launched the military effort in March.
The 36-page complaint, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Washington, argues that Obama’s decision to initiate strikes against the government of Moammar Gadhafi violated the constitution and the War Powers Resolution. Bartlett, a Western Maryland Republican, has consistently been among the most vocal critics of the way the action was initiated.
“This is not the king’s army,” Bartlett said in an interview Wednesday. “This is a terribly dangerous precedent…Clearly what he did was a violation of the constitution.”
The other House members included in the lawsuit are Reps. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, Walter Jones, R-N.C., John Conyers, D-Mich., Michael Capuano, D-Mass., Dan Burton, R-Ind., Howard Coble, R-N.C., John Duncan, R-Tenn., Timothy Johnson, R-Ill., and Ron Paul, R-Texas.
The lawsuit comes amid growing concern by members of both parties in Congress over how the military action was started. On June 2, the House passed a resolution requiring the White House to inform Congress on the scope and cost of the Libyan mission, which is currently being led by NATO. That measure passed on a 268-145 vote, with both Maryland Republicans, Bartlett and Baltimore County Rep. Andy Harris, in support.
The White House has maintained for several weeks that it is making every effort to keep Congress informed about the Libyan effort.
Bartlett was part of a similar lawsuit against then President Bill Clinton over U.S. involvement in Kosovo. The effort was not successful.








Comments
Good...maybe the President will start acting like one. You can't just go to war without Congressional approval, that and the American people don't want it.
Posted by: Dom | June 15, 2011 2:30 PM
I support the lawsuit.
Posted by: Michelle Brown | June 15, 2011 2:38 PM
Constitutionally, legislatively, and morally, Ron Paul has no equal. His 22 year voting record speaks for itself.
Mr. Paul has not survived in politics for 22 years and maintain the ethics and morality he has by being anything other than stellar.
If You refute the above comment, then I please invite You to listen to him speak about key issues. It is amazing how well he comes across because he doesn’t have to remember lies like other politicians. He understands what is happening in the world and knows how to apply the basic principles of liberty to achieve the real change that America so desperately deserves.
American to American we are all on the same team. So I present Mr. Ron Paul as my Candidate for 2011 and invite anybody to meaningfully and respectfully debate why he is not the best for American and its people in 2012.
Ron Paul = A real change, not for special interest, but for America’s Interests!
Thank You for Your time
Ron Paul 2012
Posted by: George Washington | June 15, 2011 2:39 PM
What do they expect a court to do about it? While I applaud the sentiment, these people are IN CONGRESS. They control the money. Defund the war and it stops.
Posted by: RomanTotale3d | June 15, 2011 2:40 PM
ok, so they are sueing the president. What are they gonna get out of the deal? More money that they don't need? Some kind of new perk that they don't need? What's the sense in sueing the president????
Posted by: Sandi | June 15, 2011 3:15 PM
Seriously?!?!?!?
This is so very sad.
I have started to lose my respect for Ron Paul.
Pitty our conressmen care about what our military does NOW when an election is coming up and not when it matters. How could they not know what is going on? Maybe if congress was paying attention...
Save your lame lawsuit Mr. Paul. All it will do is spend more of our tax dollars...oh wait aren't you against having too much government Mr. Paul?
Where was this type of passion when it involves pulling our troops out of iraq/afghanistan and other countries we really have no business being in?
If it wasn't an election year, this would not have been an issue.
Posted by: Chris | June 15, 2011 3:25 PM
It is the economy stupid. We are on the cusp of economic disaster and they waste time filing a law suit. VOTE THEM OUT!!!
Posted by: Nancy | June 15, 2011 3:28 PM
did these same lawmakers sue Bush over the Iraqi invasion?
Posted by: Zieanna Burton | June 15, 2011 3:53 PM
So Zieanna, are you saying that 2 wrongs make a right? Or are you OK with what Bush did?
Posted by: CP | June 15, 2011 4:10 PM
Obama, for the most part, is worthless. His going in to bust Ghadafi's balls did take guts (something most Liberals do not have).
Posted by: White Feather | June 15, 2011 4:11 PM
Ah, the Iraqi invasion was approved by Congress.
Posted by: Tom | June 15, 2011 4:16 PM
@ George Washington - I understand your sentiments, but rememeber these people can't even balance their own checkbooks.
Posted by: Momma Hanna | June 15, 2011 4:17 PM
Where are all the war protestors we saw during the Bush years? The disappearance of them shows for a fact that they were not anti-war but anti-Bush.
It is about time someone held this fool to task for his un Constitutional acts.
Obama is a Chicago street thug with a nice suit.
Posted by: Anonymous | June 15, 2011 4:32 PM
Well now, are we really to expect any honest justice from all of this ? I think not, because all Congress has to do is rewrite our constitution again as it usually does when the governbent is in trouble.
How about a newly elected baltimore county executive who believes embezzling a Critically ill Handicapped Senior Citizren's monies and confiscating Her Husbsnd's Estate to control her to bend to his outlandish blackmail threats ??
This story is going to chanel 11 soon because The Sun who sponsered this politician dropped the ball when they found out that the Court Evidence proved this about this politician and chanel 45's investigataive reporter who said he would help has suddenly retired and left for Georgia .
Will chanel 11 carry the story ? Well it is quite hard to imagine, since B of A is also included in the above acts.
Granny
Posted by: Martha E. Phillips | June 15, 2011 4:35 PM
Roscoe's not much of a Constitutional scholar. The reality is that nobody knows for certain where the boundaries of the War Powers Act are, nor whether the Act is even Constitutional.
Is the current activity in Libya sufficient to invoke the War Powers Act? We're providing support for a no-fly zone and doing some drone strikes. How does that compare to the air strikes Reagan called in on Libya without Congressional consent? What level of hostilities is required before Congressional consent is required?
If this suit is carried forward, it would be interesting to see if we end up with the SCOTUS providing some clarity. My guess is that the Congressional leadership, from both sides, will squash this before it gets that far. I don't think they want the SCOTUS to make that determination, because it could easily go against them.
Posted by: harry | June 15, 2011 5:47 PM
Why don't you sue him over the Osoma bin Laden killing!! He did not tell you about that either. This is so political and a waste of tax payer money.
Posted by: FANN | June 15, 2011 5:55 PM
When Kucinich ran for President he stated he would support the US military intervening in humanitarian crises if the UN passed a resolution supporting such intervention. Isn't this just such a situation? And many of these GOP co-sponsors hold Ronald Reagan in esteem that's short of a demi-god. Reagan sent forces into Lebanon and Grenada, and used air patrols over Libya (eventually attacking it) for much of his two terms. GWH Bush invaded Panama, and placed troops into Somalia and the NFZ over Iraq. There were no declarations of war requested or voted upon during any of these. Why aren't they voting to SUPPORT the careful role of the US in support of the NATO operation? I'd personally think that we should be more involved!
Posted by: Dr. Gerrell M. Drawhorn | June 15, 2011 7:58 PM
It is all politics all Republicans supported President George Bush in his two wars . And no lawsuit was ever filed against him.
Posted by: antvent | June 15, 2011 11:17 PM
It is all politics all Republicans supported President George Bush in his two wars . And no lawsuit was ever filed against him.
Posted by: antvent |
Maybe, just maybe, because Bush got approval of the Democrats and Republicans in congress? Maybe?
Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2011 11:53 AM
To put to rest the "Bush did it too" lie,
"Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) on Thursday ripped President Obama while giving credit to former President George W. Bush for asking Congress to authorize the war in Iraq.
The anti-war Democrat, criticizing Obama's handling of the conflict in Libya, noted that Bush formally consulted Congress on the Iraq war in 2002.
"President Bush came to Congress ... President Obama doesn't feel like he needs to come to Congress," Kucinich said during an interview on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal" program. Kucinich pointed out he was strongly opposed to the Iraq war.
Along with other lawmakers, Kucinich this week filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration on the Libyan conflict, claiming the president violated the law by not securing congressional approval.
The White House has claimed it has complied with the Constitution and the War Powers Act."
Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2011 3:33 PM
To put to rest the "Bush did it too" lie,
"Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) on Thursday ripped President Obama while giving credit to former President George W. Bush for asking Congress to authorize the war in Iraq.
The anti-war Democrat, criticizing Obama's handling of the conflict in Libya, noted that Bush formally consulted Congress on the Iraq war in 2002.
"President Bush came to Congress ... President Obama doesn't feel like he needs to come to Congress," Kucinich said during an interview on C-SPAN's "Washington Journal" program. Kucinich pointed out he was strongly opposed to the Iraq war.
Along with other lawmakers, Kucinich this week filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration on the Libyan conflict, claiming the president violated the law by not securing congressional approval."
Posted by: Anonymous | June 16, 2011 3:34 PM
Approval from Congress? Since when does a Communist Dictator require approval? The government is always right and knows what is best for us.(sarcasm intended)
Posted by: Mike | June 16, 2011 4:57 PM
Obama's time has come:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnaMWJQ7CHQ
Posted by: Observer1290 | June 17, 2011 2:13 PM
@Chris ....
Although I questioned our entrance into a soveriegn country (Iraq), entering into that was was LEGAL because Congress confirmed it by a wide margin...this law suit is because the President entered into a war ILLEGALLY without a vote from Congress. Our military and our tax dollars a spread thin enough...and this President doesn't think American Law pertains to him...and now his excuse is that it's being run by the UN...but we are paying for it and have the most military resources involved, so now America works for the UN??? They are SHREDDING the Constituion....
Posted by: Bob | June 17, 2011 4:57 PM