Assad’s actions were despicable, but we have a Constitution for a reason. Allowing the president to usurp the power of Congress defies the founders’ plan.

HOWARD, WI - The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) was enacted by Congress in response to the terrorist attack on 9/11. Intended as a national security measure, the AUMF broadly permits a president to use military force against those who “planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons.”

However, it does not grant the president the power to use military action for any other reason, such as President Donald Trump bombing Syria for President Bashar al-Assad’s presumed use of chemical weapons against his own people.

Although Assad’s actions were despicable and one might argue that bombing Syria was justified, they were clearly not a terrorist attack against the United States by organizations or persons associated with 9/11. Therefore, I believe Trump should have presented the facts to Congress before taking military action that could very well be considered an act of war.

The Constitution grants Congress, not the executive branch, the authority to declare war. If Congress continues renewing the AUMF, they are failing to hold the executive branch accountable. This check and balance was written in our Constitution to ensure that one branch of government does not have too much authority.

Allowing the president to usurp the power of Congress not only defies the founders’ mission by granting dictatorial authority to one person, but by allowing him to make this kind of vital decision without the consent of the legislative branch, is not only dangerous but could leave our country and its citizens vulnerable.

Laura Kiefert