Cover des Buchs: US Congress’ Powers under Debate
Im Shop erwerben
, um zu prüfen, ob Sie einen Vollzugriff auf diese Publikation haben.
Monographie Kein Zugriff

US Congress’ Powers under Debate

Separation of Powers and Parliamentary Politics in Times of War and Crisis
Autor:innen:
Verlag:
 2022

Zusammenfassung

Kriegs- und Notstandsbefugnisse haben im Laufe der Jahrhunderte in verschiedenen Ländern existiert und Fragen nach der damit verbundenen politischen Autorität aufgeworfen. Die Autorin zeigt, wie Kriegs- und Notstandsbefugnisse verstanden wurden und welche Art von Konzepten und Argumenten zur Definition dieser Befugnisse in den politischen Debatten in den USA von den 1970er Jahren über die Terroranschläge vom 11. September bis zur Regierung von Donald J. Trump verwendet wurden. Ziel ist es, die Kontrolle des Kongresses über die Befugnisse des Präsidenten in Ausnahmesituationen aufzuzeigen und damit einen neuen Ansatz für die Untersuchung von Kriegs- und Notstandsbefugnissen zu bieten.

Schlagworte

Publikation durchsuchen

Bibliographische Angaben

Copyrightjahr
2022
ISBN-Print
978-3-8487-8859-0
ISBN-Online
978-3-7489-3425-7
Verlag
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Reihe
Politics-Debates-Concepts. Politik-Debatten-Begriffe
Band
9
Sprache
Englisch
Seiten
317
Produkttyp
Monographie

Inhaltsverzeichnis

KapitelSeiten
  1. Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis Kein Zugriff 1 - 18
  2. 1. EMERGENCY POWERS PROBLEMATIC AND PARLIAMENTARY OVERSIGHT Kein Zugriff 19 - 29
  3. 2. PARLIAMENTARY POLITICS IN THE SEPARATION OF POWERS SYSTEM Kein Zugriff 30 - 43
    1. 3.1 The Political Context of Article 48 Kein Zugriff
    2. 3.2 Article 48 in the Weimar Republic’s 1919 Constitution Kein Zugriff
    3. 3.3 How to Differentiate the Norm From the Exception Kein Zugriff
    1. 4.1 War Powers Resolution as an Example of Right Timing in Politics Kein Zugriff
    2. 4.2 Presidentialists, Congressionalists, and the Constitutional Interpretation of War Powers Kein Zugriff
      1. The Historic Opportunity for the Congress to Restore Its Powers Kein Zugriff
      2. Constitutional Questions and the Separation of Powers in the Debates Kein Zugriff
      3. Statutory Law or Constitutional Amendment? Kein Zugriff
      4. The Constitutionality of Concurrent Resolutions to Avoid Presidential Veto Kein Zugriff
      5. Congressional Decision-Making Through Inaction Kein Zugriff
      6. Partisanship, President Nixon, and the Legitimacy of the War Powers Resolution Kein Zugriff
    4. 4.4 Settling the Differences Between the House and Senate Kein Zugriff
    5. 4.5 A Rare Opportunity for Congress to Override a President’s Veto Kein Zugriff
    6. 4.6 Separation of War Powers Following the War Powers Resolution Kein Zugriff
    7. 4.7 ‘There is Only Room for One Commander in Chief, Not 535’ Kein Zugriff
    1. 5.1 Forty-years of Emergency Government in the United States Kein Zugriff
    2. 5.2 The Legislative History of the National Emergencies Act of 1976 Kein Zugriff
    3. 5.3 The Experience of the Weimar Republic as a Historical Reference Kein Zugriff
    4. 5.4 Recognising the Need to Have an Emergency Power Legislation Kein Zugriff
    5. 5.5 Defining the Scope of National Emergencies Through the Statutory Framework Kein Zugriff
    6. 5.6 Emergency Powers Problematic: Authority vs. Accountability Kein Zugriff
    7. 5.7 ‘Absence From Dependence on Arbitrary Power’ Kein Zugriff
    1. 6.1 From United Government to Divided Government Kein Zugriff
    2. 6.2 War and Emergency Powers Legislation in the Post-9/11 Context Kein Zugriff
    3. 6.3 Terrorist Attacks as a Limit for the Rhetoric Kein Zugriff
    4. 6.4 Between Norm and Exception Kein Zugriff
  8. 7. PRESIDENT OBAMA’S CALL ON CONGRESS Kein Zugriff 260 - 266
  9. 8. ‘CONSTITUTIONAL CANNIBALISM’, SEPARATION OF POWERS, AND THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION Kein Zugriff 267 - 279
  10. 9. CONCLUSIONS Kein Zugriff 280 - 290
    1. Representatives and Senators Kein Zugriff
    2. Weimar: Kein Zugriff
    1. Weimarer Nationalversammlung Kein Zugriff
    2. Congressional Record: Kein Zugriff
    3. Individual remarks: Kein Zugriff
    4. Committee reports and hearings: Kein Zugriff
    5. Online databases and resources: Kein Zugriff
    6. Literature Kein Zugriff

Literaturverzeichnis (170)

  1. Ackerman, Bruce. 2000. ‘The New Separation of Powers’. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 113, No. 3, 642–729. Google Scholar öffnen
  2. Ackerman, Bruce. 2009. ‘Why We Need a Commission on Presidential Power’. The American Prospect. 25 March 2009. https://prospect.org/article/need-commission-presidential-power/. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  3. Agamben, Giorgio. 2005. State of Exception. Translated Kevin Atte. Chicago: Chicago UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  4. Amar, Akhil R. 2005. America’s Constitution. A Biography. New York: Random House. Google Scholar öffnen
  5. Anderson, Scott R. and Benjamin Wittes. 2020. ‘We Filed Suit Over Trump’s Missing War Powers Report’. Lawfare. 9 June 2020. https://www.lawfareblog.com/we-filed-suit-over-trumps-missing-war-powers-report. Accessed 3 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  6. Anschütz, Gerhard, Karl Bilfinger, Carl Schmitt and Erwin Jacobi. 1924. Der Deutsche Föderalismus. Die Diktatur des Reichspräsidenten. Berlin & Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar öffnen
  7. Atanassow, Ewa and Ira Katznelson. 2020. ‘Negotiating the Rule of Law: Dilemmas of Security and Liberty Revisited’. In Gary Gerstle and Joel Isaac (eds.), States of Exception in American History. Chicago and London: Chicago UP, 39–67. Google Scholar öffnen
  8. Auerswald, David. P. and Peter F. Cowhey. 1997. ‘Ballotbox Diplomacy: The War Powers Resolution and the Use of Force’. International Studies Quarterly. Vol. 41, No. 3, 505–528. Google Scholar öffnen
  9. Auerswald, David P. 2017. ‘Legislatures and civil-military relations in the United States and the United Kingdom’. West European Politics. Vol. 40, Issue 1, 42–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2016.1240404. Google Scholar öffnen
  10. Bagehot, Walter. 2000 (1872). The English Constitution. Second edition. Ontario: Batoche Books. Google Scholar öffnen
  11. Bagehot, Walter. 2001 (1867). The English Constitution. Edited by Miles Taylor. Oxford: Oxford UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  12. Balakrishnan, Gopal. 2002. The enemy: an intellectual portrait of Carl Schmitt. New York: Verso. Google Scholar öffnen
  13. Balkin, Jack M. and Sanford Levinson. 2010. ‘Constitutional Dictatorship: Its Dangers and Its Design’. Minnesota Law Review. Vol. 94, No. 6, 1790–1865. Google Scholar öffnen
  14. Barret, John Q. 2007. ‘The Nuremberg roles of Justice Robert H. Jackson’. Washington University Global Studies Law Review. Vol. 6, Issue 3, 511–525. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_globalstudies/vol6/iss3/5/. Accessed 3 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  15. Barron, David J. and Martin S. Lederman. 2008a. ‘The Commander in Chief at the Lowest Ebb – Framing the Problem, Doctrine, and Original Understanding’. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 121, No. 3, 689–804. Google Scholar öffnen
  16. Barron, David J. and Martin S. Lederman. 2008b. ‘The Commander in Chief at the Lowest Ebb – A Constitutional History’. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 121, No. 4, 941–1112. Google Scholar öffnen
  17. Binder, Sarah A. 2010. ‘Testimony. The History of Filibuster’. Brookings. 22 April 2010. https://www.brookings.edu/testimonies/the-history-of-the-filibuster/. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  18. Björk, Anna. 2011. The politics of citizenship tests: time, integration and the contingent polity. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä. Jyväskylä studies in education, psychology and social research, 431. Google Scholar öffnen
  19. Blumenauer, Earl. 2019. ‘Press release: Blumenauer, Ocasio-Cortez, and Sanders Introduce Resolution to Declare the Climate Crisis as National Emergency’. 9 July 2019. https://blumenauer.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/blumenauer-ocasio-cortez-and-sanders-introduce-resolution-declare. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  20. Bolton, Alexander. 2020. ‘Democrats conflicted over how to limit Trump’s war powers’. The Hill. 11 January 2020. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/477763-democrats-conflicted-over-how-to-limit-trumps-war-powers. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  21. Bradley, Curtis A. and Jack L. Goldsmith. 2005. ‘Congressional Authorization and the War on Terrorism’. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 118, No. 7, 2048–2133. Google Scholar öffnen
  22. Brandeis, Louis. 1926. ‘Dissenting opinion, Myers v. United States, 272 US 52 (1926)’. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0272_0052_ZD1.html. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  23. Brecht, Arnold. 1944. Prelude to Silence. The end of the German Republic. New York: Oxford UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  24. Brockmeier Sarah, Oliver Stuenkel, Marcos Tourinho. 2015. ‘The Impact of the Libya Intervention. Debates on Norms of Protection’. Global Society. Vol. 30, Issue 1, 113–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13600826.2015.1094029. Google Scholar öffnen
  25. Brose, Ekkehard. 2013. ‘When Germany Sends Troop Abroad. The case for a limited reform of the Parliamentary Participation Act’. SWP Research Paper. https://www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/research_papers/2013_RP09_bre.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  26. Burns, Sarah. 2019. The Politics of War Powers. The Theory and History of Presidential Unilateralism. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas. Google Scholar öffnen
  27. Burns, Sarah. 2021. ‘Legalizing a Political Fight: Congressional Abdication of War Powers in the Bush and Obama Administrations’. Presidential Studies Quarterly. Vol. 51, No. 3, 462–491. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/psq.12729. Google Scholar öffnen
  28. Böller, Florian. 2017. ‘Debating War and Peace: US Congress and the Domestic Legitimatization of Military Interventions’. Democracy and Security. Vol. 13, Issue 3, 196–219. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17419166.2017.1326309. Google Scholar öffnen
  29. Böller, Florian. 2021. ‘Vandenberg Vanished: US Congress and the Politicization of Military Interventions’. Parliamentary Affairs. Published 29 March 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsab023. Google Scholar öffnen
  30. Caldwell, Peter C. 1997. Popular Sovereignty and the Crisis of German Constitutional Law. The theory and Practice of Weimar Constitutionalism. Durham & London: Duke UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  31. Campion, Gilbert. 1958 (1929). An Introduction to the Procedure of the House of House of Commons. London: McMillan & CO Ltd. Google Scholar öffnen
  32. Carcia, Michael John. 2012. ‘War Powers Ligitation Initiated by Members of Congress Since the Enactment of the War Powers Resolution’. CRS report for Congress. Order Code RL30352, 17 February 17 2012. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/natsec/RL30352.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  33. Carney, Jordain. 2016. ‘McConnell fast-tracks Graham’s ISIS war bill’. The Hill. 21 January 2016. https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/266583-mcconnell-fast-tracks-isis-war-bill/. Accessed 12 August 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  34. Carney, Jordain. 2019. ‘Paul blocks vote on House-passed Syria resolution for second time’. The Hill. 22 October 2019. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/467012-paul-blocks-vote-on-house-passed-syria-resolution-for-second-time. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  35. Carter, Stephen L. 1984. ‘The Constitutionality of the War Powers Resolution’. Virginia Law Review. Vol. 70, No. 1, 101–134. Google Scholar öffnen
  36. Casey, Christopher A., Ian F. Ferguson, Dianne E. Rennack, Jennifer K. Elsea. 2020. ‘The International Economic Powers Act: Origins, Evolution, and Use’. CRS report for Congress. Order Code R45618, 14 July 2020. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R45618.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  37. Chafetz, Josh. 2017. Congress’s Constitution. Legislative Authority and the Separation of Powers. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  38. Collier, Ellen C. and Richard F. Grimmet. 2019. ‘The War Powers Resolution: Concepts and Practice’. CRS report for Congress. Order code R42699, updated 8 March 2019. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/natsec/R42699.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  39. Dean, John. 2002. ‘FindLaw Forum: President needs congressional approval to declare war on Iraq’. https://edition.cnn.com/2002/LAW/08/columns/fl.dean.warpowers/index.html. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  40. Desiderio, Andrew. 2021a. ‘Unlikely Senate alliance aims to claw back Congress’ foreign policy powers “before it’s too late”’. Politico. 20 July 2021. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/20/bipartisan-senators-congress-war-powers-500214. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  41. Desiderio, Andrew. 2021b. ‘Iraq War authorization repeal clears key Senate hurdle’. Politico. 4 August 2021. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/04/iraq-war-authorization-repeal-502382. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  42. Dyzenhaus, David. 1997a. Legality and Legitimacy. Carl Schmitt, Hans Kelsen and Herman Heller in Weimar. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  43. Dyzenhaus, David. 1997b. ‘Legal Theory in the Collapse of Weimar’. The American Political Science Review. Vol. 91, No. 1, 121–134. Google Scholar öffnen
  44. Dyzenhaus, David. 2020. ‘Beyond the Exception’. In Gary Gerstle and Joel Isaac (eds.), States of Exception in American History. Chicago and London: Chicago UP, 68–91. Google Scholar öffnen
  45. Ely, John H. 1988. ‘Suppose Congress Wanted a War Powers Act that Worked’. Columbia Law Review. Vol. 88, No. 7, 1379–1431. Google Scholar öffnen
  46. Emerson, Terry. 1971. ‘War Powers Legislation’. West Virginia Law Review. Vol. 74, Issue 1, 53–119. Google Scholar öffnen
  47. Farr, James. 1989. ‘Understanding conceptual change politically’. In Terrence Ball, James Farr, Russell L. Hanson (eds.), Political innovation and conceptual change. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 24–49. Google Scholar öffnen
  48. Ferejohn, John and Pasquale Pasquino. 2004. ‘The law of the exception: A typology of emergency powers’. International Journal of Constitutional Law. Vol. 2, No. 2, 210–239. Google Scholar öffnen
  49. Finlayson, Alan. 2017. ‘What is the Point of Parliamentary Debate? Deliberation, Oratory, Opposition and Spectacle in the British House of Commons’. Redescriptions. Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory. Vol. 20, No. 1, 11–31. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7227/R.20.1.2. Google Scholar öffnen
  50. Fisher, Louis. 1995. ‘The Korean War: On What Legal Basis Did Truman Act?’ The American Journal of International Law. Vol. 89, No. 1, 21–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2203888. Google Scholar öffnen
  51. Fisher, Louis. 1997. ‘Sidestepping Congress: Presidents Acting under the UN and NATO’. Case Western Law Review. Vol. 47, Issue 4, 1237–1279. Google Scholar öffnen
  52. Fisher, Louis and David Gray Adler. 1998. ‘The War Powers Resolution: Time to Say Goodbye’. Political Science Quarterly. Vol. 113, No. 1, 1–20. Google Scholar öffnen
  53. Fisher, Louis. 2005. ‘Judicial Review of the War Power’. Presidential Studies Quarterly. Vol. 35, Issue 3, 466–495. Google Scholar öffnen
  54. Fisher, Louis. 2007. Constitutional Conflicts between Congress and the President. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. Google Scholar öffnen
  55. Fisher, Louis. 2011. Defending Congress and the Constitution. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. Google Scholar öffnen
  56. Fonck, Daan and Yf Reykers. 2018. ‘Parliamentarisation as a Two-Way Process: Explaining Prior Parliamentary Consultation for Military Interventions’. Parliamentary Affairs. Vol. 71, Issue 3, 674–696. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/gsx081. Google Scholar öffnen
  57. Ford, Gerald. 1976. ‘Statement on Signing the National Emergencies Act’. September 14, 1976. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=6334#axzz1tWR223gE. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  58. Fraenkel, Ernst. 1960. Das amerikanische Regierungssystem. Eine politische Analyse. Köln und Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  59. Friedrich, Carl J. 1928. ‘The Issue of Judicial Review in Germany’. Political Science Quarterly. Vol. 43, No. 2, 188–200. Google Scholar öffnen
  60. Frykholm, Lars. 1942. Studier över artikel 48 i Weimar-författningen. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells Boktryckeri A.B. Google Scholar öffnen
  61. Fuller, Glenn E. 1979. ‘The National Emergency Dilemma: Balancing the Executive’s Crisis Powers with the Need for Accountability’. Southern California Law Review. Vol. 52, 1453–1511. Google Scholar öffnen
  62. Garvey, Todd. 2012. ‘Presidential Signing Statements: Constitutional and Institutional Implications’. CRS Report for Congress. Order Code RL33667, 4 January 2012. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33667.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  63. Genovese, Michael A. and David Gray Adler. 2017. The War Powers in the Age of Terrorism. Debating Presidential Powers. New York: Palgrave and Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  64. Gerstle, Gary and Joel Isaac. 2020. ‘Introduction’. In Gary Gerstle and Joel Isaac (eds.), States of Exception in American History. Chicago and London: Chicago UP, 1–13. Google Scholar öffnen
  65. Glennon, Michael J. 1984a. ‘The War Powers Resolution Ten Years Later: More Politics than Law’. The American Journal of International Law. Vol. 78, No. 3, 571–581. Google Scholar öffnen
  66. Glennon, Michael J. 1984b. ‘The War Powers Resolution: Sad Record, Dismal Promise’. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review. Vol. 17, No. 3, 657–670. Google Scholar öffnen
  67. Goitein, Elizabeth. 2019. ‘The Alarming Scope of the President’s Emergency Powers’. Atlantic, January/February 2019. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/01/presidential-emergency-powers/576418/. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  68. Goldberg, Jeffrey. 2016. ‘The Obama Doctrine’. The Atlantic. April 2016 issue. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/04/the-obama-doctrine/471525/. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  69. Goldsmith, Jack and Samuel Moyn. 2021. ‘Does Biden Really Want to End the Forever Wars?’ The New York Times. Opinion. 22 March 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/22/opinion/biden-forever-wars.html. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  70. Grimmet, Richard F. 2010. ‘The War Powers Resolution: After Thirty-Six Years’. CRS Report for Congress. Order Code R41199, 22 April 2010. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R41199.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  71. Gross, Oren and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin. 2006. Law in Times of Crisis. Emergency Powers in Theory and Practice. New York: Cambridge UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  72. Haapala, Taru. 2016. Political Rhetoric in the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, 1830–1870. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  73. Hamilton, Alexander. 1788. ‘The Real Character of the Executive’. The Federalist Papers. No. 69. https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/full-text. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  74. Hamilton, Alexander. 1788. ‘New York Ratifying Convention. First Speech of June 25 (Francis Childs’s Version), [25 June 1788]’. Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-05v02-0012-0027. [Original source: The Papers of Alexander Hamilton, vol. 5, June 1788 – November 1789, ed. Harold C. Syrett. New York: Columbia University Press, 1962, 80–86.] Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  75. Holborn, Hajo. 1975. A History of Modern Germany 1840–1945. New York: Alfred A Knopf. Google Scholar öffnen
  76. Honig, Bonnie. 2011. Paradox, Law, Democracy. Emergency Politics. New Jersey: Princeton UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  77. Howell, Beryl A. 2004. ‘Seven Weeks: The Making of the USA PATRIOT Act’. George Washington Law Review. Vol. 72, Issue 6, 1145–1207. Google Scholar öffnen
  78. Howell, William G. and Jon C. Pevehouse. 2005. ‘Presidents, Congress, and the Use of Force’. International Organization. Vol. 59, Issue 1, 209–232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818305050034. Google Scholar öffnen
  79. Häkkinen, Teemu. 2014. ‘The concept of the Royal Prerogative in parliamentary debates on the deployment of military in the British House of Commons, 1982–2003’. Redescriptions. Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory. Vol. 17, No. 2, 160–179. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.17.2.4. Google Scholar öffnen
  80. Ihalainen, Pasi and Kari Palonen. 2009. ‘Parliamentary sources in the comparative study of conceptual history: methodological aspects and illustrations of a research proposal’. Parliaments, Estates & Representation. Vol. 29, Issue 1, 17–34. Google Scholar öffnen
  81. Ihalainen, Pasi and Satu Matikainen. 2016. ‘The British Parliament and Foreign Policy in the 20th Century: Towards Increasing Parliamentarisation?’ Parliamentary History. Vol. 35 No. 1, 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1750–0206.12180. Google Scholar öffnen
  82. Ihalainen, Pasi and Aleksi Sahala. 2020. ‘Evolving Conceptualisations of Internationalism in the UK Parliament. Collocation Analyses from the League to Brexit’. In Mats Fridlund, Mila Oiva, and Petri Paju (eds.), Digital Histories: Emergent Approaches within the New Digital History. Helsinki University Press, 199–219. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33134/HUP-5-12. Google Scholar öffnen
  83. Jackson, Robert H. 1952. ‘Concurring opinion, Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952)’. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0343_0579_ZC2.html. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  84. Javits, Jacob K. 1985. ‘War Powers Reconsidered’. Foreign Affairs. Vol. 64, No.1, 130–140. Google Scholar öffnen
  85. Jefferson, Thomas. 1801. ‘Jefferson’s Manual of parliamentary practice’. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/HMAN-105/content-detail.html. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  86. Johnson, Richard. 2021. ‘The 1982 Voting Rights Act Extension as a “Critical Juncture:” Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, and Republican Party-Building’. Studies in American Political Development. Vol. 35, Issue 2, 223–238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898588X21000079. Google Scholar öffnen
  87. Kelsen, Hans. 1930–1931. ‘Wer soll der Hüter der Verfassung sein?’ Die Justiz. Vol. 6, 576–628. Google Scholar öffnen
  88. Kelsen, Hans. 1942. ‘Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the Austrian and the American Constitution’. The Journal of Politics. Vol. 4, No. 2, 183–200. Google Scholar öffnen
  89. Klieman, Aaron S. 1979a. ‘Preparing for the Hour of Need: The National Emergencies Act’. Presidential Studies Quarterly. Vol. 9, No. 1, 47–65. Google Scholar öffnen
  90. Klieman, Aaron S. 1979b. ‘Preparing for the Hour of Need: Emergency Powers in the United States’. The Review of Politics. Vol. 41, No. 2, 235–255. Google Scholar öffnen
  91. Koger, Gregory. 2010. Filibustering: A Political History of Obstruction in the House and Senate. Chicago: Chicago UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  92. Koh, Harold H. 1988. ‘Why the President (Almost) Always Wins in Foreign Affairs: Lessons of the Iran-Contra Affairs’. The Yale Law Journal. Vol. 97, No. 7, 1255–1342. Google Scholar öffnen
  93. Kolb, Eberhard. 1984. Die Weimarer Republik. München: Oldenbourg Verlagen. Google Scholar öffnen
  94. Kriner, Douglas L. 2018. ‘Congress, public opinion, and an informal constraint on the commander-in-chief’. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations. Vol. 20, No. 1, 52–68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745860. Google Scholar öffnen
  95. Kronlund, Anna. 2013. Parliamentary Oversight of the Exceptional Situations in a Presidential System. Debating the Reassertion of the Constitutional Powers of the US Congress. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä. Jyväskylä studies in education, psychology and social research, 468. Google Scholar öffnen
  96. Kronlund, Anna. 2015. ‘The US Congress and decision-making on war: Debates on war powers in the separation of powers system’. FIIA Working Paper no. 83. https://www.fiia.fi/en/publication/the-us-congress-and-decision-making-on-war. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  97. Kronlund, Anna. 2019. ‘”The Iraq War Momentum” in the Struggle on the Powers of the US Congress’. Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory. Vol. 22, No. 1, 51–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33134/rds.311. Google Scholar öffnen
  98. Kurz, Achim. 1992. Demokratische Diktatur? Auslegung und Handhabung des Artikels 48 der Weimarer Verfassung 1919–1925. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Google Scholar öffnen
  99. Lasswell, Harold. 1958 (1936). Who Gets What, When, How. New York: Meridian Books Google Scholar öffnen
  100. Lazar, Nomi Claire. 2009. States of Emergency in Liberal Democracies. New York: Cambridge UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  101. Lazar, Nomi Claire. 2020. ‘What is the State of Exception?’ In Gary Gerstle and Joel Isaac (eds.), States of Exception in American History. Chicago and London: Chicago UP, 17–38. Google Scholar öffnen
  102. Lehnert, Detlef. 1999. Die Weimarer Republik. Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam jun. Google Scholar öffnen
  103. Lindseth, Peter L. 2004. ‘The Paradox of Parliamentary Supremacy: Delegation, Democracy, and Dictatorship in Germany and France, 1920s-1950s’. The Yale Law Journal. Vol. 113, No. 7, 1341–1415. Google Scholar öffnen
  104. Lobel, Jules. 1989. ‘Emergency Power and the Decline of Liberalism’. The Yale Law Journal. Vol. 98, No. 7, 1385–1433. Google Scholar öffnen
  105. Madison, James. 1788. ‘The Particular Structure of the New Government and the Distribution of Power Among its Different Parts’. The Federalist Papers. No. 47. https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/full-text. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  106. Madison, James or Hamilton, Alexander. 1788. ‘The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments’. The Federalist Papers. No. 51. https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/full-text. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  107. Madison, James or Hamilton, Alexander. 1788. ‘The Total Number of the House of Representatives’. The Federalist Papers. No. 55. https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/full-text. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  108. Mann, Thomas E. and Norman J. Ornstein. 2008. The Broken Branch. How Congress is Failing America and How to Get it Back on Track. New York: Oxford UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  109. McKay, William and Charles W. Johnson. 2010. Parliament and Congress. Representation and Scrutiny in the Twenty-First Century. Oxford: Oxford UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  110. Mello, Patrick. A., Dirk Peters. 2018. ‘Parliaments in Security Policy: Involvement, Politicisation, and Influence’. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations. Vol. 20, Issue 1, 3–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148117745684. Google Scholar öffnen
  111. Mergel, Thomas. 2002. Parlamentarische Kultur in der Weimarer Republik. Düsseldorf: Droste Verlag. Google Scholar öffnen
  112. Mommsen, Hans. 1996. The Rise and Fall of Weimar Democracy. Translated by Elborg Forster and Larry Eugene Jones. Chapel Hill & London: The University of North Carolina Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  113. Newton, Michael. A. 2012. ‘Inadvertent Implications of the War Powers Resolution’. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law. Vol. 45, Issue 1/2, 173–195. Accessed via Proquest. Google Scholar öffnen
  114. Palonen, Kari. 2006. The Struggle With Time. A Conceptual History of ‘Politics’ as an Activity. Hamburg, London: LIT Verlag Münster. Google Scholar öffnen
  115. Palonen, Kari. 2007. Rethinking Politics. Essays from a quarter-century. Ed. by Kia Lindroos. Helsinki: The Finnish Political Science Association. Google Scholar öffnen
  116. Palonen, Kari. 2008. The Politics of Limited Times. The Rhetoric of Temporal Judgment in Parliamentary Democracies. Baden-Baden: Nomos. Google Scholar öffnen
  117. Palonen, Kari. 2010. ‘Book Review, A Lost Momentum of Parliamentary Democracy?’ Redescriptions. Vol. 14, Issue 1, 203–208. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.14.1.13. Google Scholar öffnen
  118. Palonen, Kari. 2013. ‘Parliamentarism as a European type of polity – Constructing the presidentialism vs. parliamentarism divide in Walter Bagehot’s English Constitution’. In Meike Schmidt-Gleim and Claudia Wiesner (eds.), Meanings of Europe. London: Routledge, 74–87. Google Scholar öffnen
  119. Paris, Francesca. 2019. ‘16 States Sue Over Trump’s National Emergency Declaration’. NPR. 18 February 2019. https://www.npr.org/2019/02/18/695821740/16-states-sue-over-trumps-national-emergency-declaration. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  120. Patch, William L. Jr. 1998. Heinrich Brüning and the Dissolution of the Weimar Republic. Cambridge, New York, Melbourne: Cambridge UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  121. Pettit, Philip. 2002. Republicanism. A Theory of Freedom and Government. New York: Oxford UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  122. Phelps, Glenn A. and Timothy S. Boylan. 2002. ‘Discourses of War: The Landscape of Congressional Rhetoric’. Armed Forces & Society. Vol. 28, No. 4, 641–667. Google Scholar öffnen
  123. Pocock, J.G.A. 1981. ‘The Machiavellian Moment Revisited: A Study in History and Ideology’. The Journal of Modern History. Vol. 53, No. 1, 49–72. Google Scholar öffnen
  124. Pocock, J.G.A. 2003 (1975). The Machiavellian Moment. Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition. New Jersey: Princeton UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  125. Pradshaw, Kenneth and David Pring. 1972. Congress and the Parliament. London: Quartet Books. Google Scholar öffnen
  126. Preuss, Hugo. 1923. ‘Reichsverfassungsmässige Diktatur’. Zeitschrift für Politik. Dreizehnter Band 1923/1924, 97–113. Google Scholar öffnen
  127. Pyle, Christopher H. and Richard M. Pious. 1984. The President, Congress and the Constitution. Power and Legitimacy in American Politics. New York: The Free Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  128. Ramsey, Michael D. 2012. ‘Textualism and War Powers’. The University of Chicago Law Review. Vol. 69, No. 4, 1543–1638. DOI: https://doi-org.ezproxy.jyu.fi/10.2307/1600614. Google Scholar öffnen
  129. Raunio, Tapani and Wolfgang Wagner. 2017. ‘Towards parliamentarisation of foreign and security politics?’ West European Politics. Vol. 40, Issue 1, 1–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2016.1240411. Google Scholar öffnen
  130. Relyea, Harold C. 2005. ‘Continuity of Government: Current Federal Arrangements and the Future’. CRS report for Congress. Order Code RS21089, 5 August 2005. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RS21089.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  131. Relyea, Harold C. 2007. ‘National Emergency Powers’. CRS report for Congress. Order Code 98–505 GOV, 30 August 2007. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/98-505.pdf (updated in 2021.) Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  132. Remini, Robert. 2006. The History of the House of Representatives. New York: Smithsonian Books in association with HarperCollins Publishers. Google Scholar öffnen
  133. Rhodes, Ben. 2018. ‘Inside the White House During the Syrian ‘Red Line’ Crisis’. The Atlantic. 3 June 2018. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/06/inside-the-white-house-during-the-syrian-red-line-crisis/561887/. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  134. Richter, Melvin and Michaela W. Richter. 2006. ‘Introduction: Translation of Reinhart Koselleck’s “Krise” in Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe’. Journal of the History of Ideas. Vol. 67, No. 2, 343–356. Google Scholar öffnen
  135. Rogers, William P. 1971. ‘Congress, the President, and the War Powers’. California Law Review. Vol. 59, No. 5, 1194–1214. Google Scholar öffnen
  136. Rostow, Eugene V. 1986. ‘”Once More Unto the Breach:” The War Powers Resolution Revisited’. Valparaiso University Law Review. Vol. 21, No. 1, 1–52. Google Scholar öffnen
  137. Saunders, Elizabeth. 2014. Leaders at War: How Presidents Shape Military Interventions. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. Google Scholar öffnen
  138. Savage, Charlie and Mark Landler. 2011. ‘White House Defends Continuing US Role in Libya Operation’. The New York Times. 15 June 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/16/us/politics/16powers.html?pagewanted=all. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  139. Scheppele, Kim Lane. 2004. ‘Law in a time of emergency: States of exception and the temptations of 9/11’. Journal of Constitutional Law. Vol. 6, No. 5, 1001–1083. Google Scholar öffnen
  140. Scheppele, Kim Lane. 2006. ‘Small emergencies’. Georgia Law Review. Vol. 40, Issue 3, 835–862. Google Scholar öffnen
  141. Schlesinger, Arthur Jr. 2004. The Imperial Presidency. Boston, New York: A Mariner Book Houghton Mifflin Company. Google Scholar öffnen
  142. Schmitt, Carl. 1985 (1922). Politische Theologie. Vier Kapitel zur Lehre von der Souveränität. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Google Scholar öffnen
  143. Schmitt, Carl. 1994 (1921). Die Diktatur. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot. Google Scholar öffnen
  144. Skinner, Quentin. 1996. Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  145. Skinner, Quentin. 1998. Liberty Before Liberalism. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  146. Soininen, Suvi and Tapani Turkka. 2008. The Parliamentary Style of Politics. Helsinki: The Finnish Political Science Association. Google Scholar öffnen
  147. Spong, William B. Jr. 1971. ‘Can Balance Be Restored in the Constitutional War Powers of the President and Congress?’ University of Richmond Law Review. Vol. 6, No. 1, 1–47. Google Scholar öffnen
  148. Spong, William B. Jr. 1975. ‘The War Powers Resolution Revisited: Historic Accomplishment or Surrender?’ William and Mary Law Review. Vol. 16, Issue 4, 823–882. Google Scholar öffnen
  149. Steiner, Jürg, André Bächtiger, Markus Spörndli and Marco R. Steenbergen. 2004. Deliberative Politics in Action. Analyzing Parliamentary Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  150. Stirk, Peter. 2005. ‘Hugo Preuss, German Political Thought and the Weimar Constitution’. History of Political Thought. Vol. 23, No. 3, 497–516. Google Scholar öffnen
  151. Stolleis, Michael. 2003. ‘Judicial Review, Administrative Review, and Constitutional Review in the Weimar Republic’. Ratio Juris. Vol. 16, Issue 2, 266–280. Google Scholar öffnen
  152. Stolleis, Michael. 2004. A History of Public Law in Germany 1914–1945. Translated by Thomas Dunlap. New York: Oxford UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  153. Stone, George R. 2005. Perilous Times. Free Speech in Wartime. From the Sedition Act of 1798 to the War on Terrorism. New York & London: W.W. Norton & Company. Google Scholar öffnen
  154. Stone, George R. 2007. War and Liberty. An American Dilemma: 1790 to Present. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Google Scholar öffnen
  155. Torreon Salazar, Barbara and Sofia Plagakis. 2020. ‘Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad’. CRS report for Congress. Order Code R42739, Updated 20 July 2020. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R42738. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  156. Truman, Harry S. 1950. ‘Proclamation 2914 – Proclaiming the Existence of a National Emergency’. The American Presidency Project. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/proclamation-2914-proclaiming-the-existence-national-emergency. Accessed 8 August 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  157. Wagner, Wolfgang. 2020. The Democratic Politics of Military Interventions. Political Parties, Contestation, and Decisions to use Force Abroad. Oxford: Oxford UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  158. Walt, Stephen M. 2019. ‘America’s Polarization is a Foreign Policy Problem, Too’. Foreign Policy. 11 March 2019. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/03/11/americas-polarization-is-a-foreign-policy-problem-too/. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  159. Ward, Alex. 2021. ‘White House signals support for replacing decades-long authorizations for military force’. Vox. 5 March 2021. https://www.vox.com/2021/3/5/22315258/white-house-biden-authorization-military-force-forever-wars. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  160. Weed, Matthew C. 2017. ‘A New Authorization for Use of Military Force Against the Islamic State: Issues and Current Proposals’. CRS report for Congress. Order Code R43760, 21 February 2017. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/natsec/R43760.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  161. Wiesner, Claudia, Taru Haapala, Kari Palonen. 2017. Debates, rhetoric and political action: practices of textual interpretation and analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar öffnen
  162. Wiley, James. 2016. Politics and the Concept of the Political. The Political Imagination. New York and London: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen
  163. Wilson, Graham K. 2009. ‘Congress in Comparative Perspective’. Boston Law Review. Vol. 89, No. 2, 827–845. Google Scholar öffnen
  164. Wilson, Woodrow. 1900 (1884). Congressional Government: A study in American Politics. Boston & New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. Google Scholar öffnen
  165. Wilson, Woodrow. 1961 (1908). Constitutional Government in the United States. New York: Columbia UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  166. Wolfe, Alan. 2009. The Future of Liberalism. New York: Vintage Book. Google Scholar öffnen
  167. Yeh, Brian T. and Charles Doyle. 2006. ‘USA Patriot Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005: A Legal Analysis’. CRS report for Congress. Order Code RL33332, 21 December 2006. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL33332.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2022. Google Scholar öffnen
  168. Zablocki, Clement J. 1984. ‘War Powers Resolution: Its Past Record and Future Promise’. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review. Vol. 17, No. 3, 579–598. Google Scholar öffnen
  169. Zeisberg, Mariah. 2013. War Powers. The Politics of Constitutional Authority. Princeton: Princeton UP. Google Scholar öffnen
  170. Zurcher, Arnold J. 1950. ‘The Presidency, Congress and Separation of Powers: A Reappraisal’. The Western Political Quarterly. Vol. 3, No. 1, 75–97. Google Scholar öffnen

Ähnliche Veröffentlichungen

aus dem Schwerpunkt "Regierung & Regierungslehre & Verwaltung", "Vergleichende Politikforschung & Länderstudien", "Friedensforschung & Konfliktforschung", "Internationale Beziehungen"
Cover des Buchs: Die politische Rechte in Lateinamerika
Sammelband Vollzugriff
Nadja Ahmad, Hans-Jürgen Burchardt, Kristina Dietz, Hannes Warnecke-Berger, Jonas Wolff
Die politische Rechte in Lateinamerika
Cover des Buchs: Weltbilder und Weltordnung
Lehrbuch Kein Zugriff
Gert Krell, Peter Schlotter, Alexandra Homolar, Frank A. Stengel
Weltbilder und Weltordnung
Cover des Buchs: Europa
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Hans Jörg Schrötter
Europa
Cover des Buchs: Democratic Crisis Revisited
Sammelband Kein Zugriff
Meike Schmidt-Gleim, Ruzha Smilova, Claudia Wiesner
Democratic Crisis Revisited
Cover des Buchs: Scottish Unionist Ideology 1886-1965
Monographie Kein Zugriff
Jonathan Wales
Scottish Unionist Ideology 1886-1965

Hinweis

Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt und darf nur nach den Vorgaben der Nutzungs- und Lizenzvereinbarung genutzt werden. Jede darüber hinaus gehende Nutzung des Werkes ist ausdrücklich untersagt und wird verfolgt.

Feedback geben

Wir freuen uns über Ihr Feedback zu Inhalten und Funktionen. Ihre Nachricht hilft uns, unseren Service stetig zu verbessern.

Bewertung
Bild anhängen
oder hier ablegen
PNG oder JPG (max. 3 MB)

Anmelden

Passwort vergessen?
Login via Open Athens
Noch kein Benutzerkonto?
Jetzt registrieren

Publikation zitieren

Download: RIS BibTex