Example Image
Civitas Outlook
Topic
Constitutionalism
Published on
Sep 19, 2025
Contributors
John Yoo
Photo by Sunira Moses on Unsplash

The Long History of Presidential Discretion

Contributors
John Yoo
John Yoo
Senior Research Fellow
John Yoo
Summary
The Framers did not expect Congress to preauthorize every use of force or to manage military campaigns.
Summary
The Framers did not expect Congress to preauthorize every use of force or to manage military campaigns.
Listen to this article

In “The Long Descent to Unilateralism,” Professor Sarah Burns argues that our nation has ended up at a constitutional place that the Framers did not intend. For much of the nation’s early history, she believes, presidents sought congressional approval before using force; Congress debated and funded or rejected those ventures, and power rebalanced once wars ended. Burns claims this pattern eroded after the Spanish–American War and is virtually absent today, leaving decisions over war almost entirely in the hands of the president.

But Burns finds us at the wrong destination because she begins the voyage from the wrong launch point. Burns’s account goes awry, first, because she mistakenly believes that the Constitution’s Declare War Clause requires Congress to preauthorize every conflict. The Clause, however, does not bear that weight. Second, she believes that presidents have seized this power because executives have continuously waged war without congressional permission. This imagines that the Framers imposed their approach to domestic policy—Congress authorizes first, the president executes second—upon the very different setting of national security and foreign affairs.

But instead of this strict, legalistic understanding of war, the Constitution adopts a flexible, political system for making the decision to go to war. The Framers deliberately separated the power to declare and fund wars from the power to start and direct them. They created a flexible system in which both branches could influence war policy. The Constitution allows Congress to retain an effective check on war-making through its power of the purse, while allowing the president to act with the speed and energy necessary to protect the nation’s security. Rather than a story of presidential usurpation, the American practice of war powers shows a president and Congress that have agreed on the basic structure and purpose of the American armed forces, the grand strategy pursued by the nation over decades, and individual wars throughout the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

Continue reading at Law & Liberty.

10:13
1x
10:13
More articles

Revival: Americans Heading Back to the Hinterlands

Pursuit of Happiness
Sep 19, 2025

Returning to First Principles on Free Speech

Politics
Sep 19, 2025
View all

Join the newsletter

Receive new publications, news, and updates from the Civitas Institute.

Sign up
More on

Constitutionalism

Rational Judicial Review: Constitutions as Power-sharing Agreements, Secession, and the Problem of Dred Scott

Judicial review and originalism serve as valuable commitment mechanisms to enforce future compliance with a political bargain.

John Yoo
Constitutionalism
Sep 15, 2025
Amicus Brief: Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish

Civitas Research Fellow Michael Toth's work was cited in a Supreme Court brief.‍

Michael Toth
Constitutionalism
Sep 11, 2025
Epstein & Yoo: Amicus Brief in Supreme Court of Maryland

Civitas Senior Research Fellows Richard Epstein and John Yoo, alongside the Mountain States Legal Foundation, filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of Maryland.

Richard Epstein, John Yoo
Constitutionalism
Jul 24, 2025
Religious Exemptions?: What the Free Exercise Clause Means

A conversation among three religious liberty scholars on the Free Exercise Clause’s original meaning.

Andrew Koppelman, Michael McConnell, Vincent Phillip Muñoz
Constitutionalism
Apr 28, 2025

The Libertarian

The inimitable Richard Epstein offers his unique perspective on national developments in public policy and the law.

View all
** items

Law Talk

Welcome to Law Talk with Richard Epstein and John Yoo. Our show is hosted by Charles C. W. Cooke.

View all
** items
Why Trump’s ‘Emergency’ Tariffs Won’t Fly

The trade deficit isn’t a sudden surprise, short in duration, and great in harm: the usual characteristics of an emergency.

John Yoo
Constitutionalism
Sep 2, 2025
Democracy in Britain: The Lords’ Work

Part 2: How the “hereditary peers” enhance lawmaking and support the soft power of the UK.

David L. Leal
Constitutionalism
Aug 6, 2025
The American Revolutions of 1776

America's founding was animated by both the spirit of liberty and the spirit of religion — a philosophical and practical achievement worth understanding and attempting to recover today.

Vincent Philip Muñoz
Constitutionalism
Jun 23, 2025
The Progressive Presidency Envelops American Politics

One does not need to revisit the drastic consequences that ensued from COVID-19 policies to be reminded of the failures and mistakes of the progressive constitutional framework that issued them.

Richard M. Reinsch II
Constitutionalism
May 27, 2025

Epstein: Executive Power & Authoritarianism

Constitutionalism
Sep 17, 2025
1:05

Epstein: Tim Kaine’s Misunderstanding of Natural Rights

Constitutionalism
Sep 15, 2025
1:05

Why Postliberalism Is Gaining Ground: Phillip Muñoz on America’s Founding Values

Constitutionalism
Aug 7, 2025
1:05

Richard Epstein: The Constitution, Parental Rights, and More

Constitutionalism
Jul 7, 2025
1:05

Yuval Levin on How the Constitution Unified our Nation – and Could Again

Constitutionalism
Mar 27, 2025
1:05
No items found.
No items found.
Living With and Coping With Gerrymandering

At best, the problem only has partial solutions.

Richard Epstein
Constitutionalism
Sep 10, 2025
Humphrey’s Executor and the Future of Presidential Power

The U.S. Supreme Court is almost certain to hold that President Trump lawfully fired Rebecca Slaughter from her role as a Commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission.

Aaron L. Nielson
Constitutionalism
Sep 9, 2025
Restoring the Constitution’s Presidency: Modifying Myers and Overruling Humphrey’s

The Constitution’s President is a modest republican magistrate with a considerable but still limited job description.

Robert G. Natelson
Constitutionalism
Sep 9, 2025
What Could the Supreme Court Rule About Trump's Tariffs?

While the Federal Circuit erred in its reading of IEEPA, it still reached the right result because of a question it strangely avoided.

John Yoo
Constitutionalism
Sep 8, 2025
No items found.