DOCSLIB.ORG

I Three Essays on Decisions to Use Military Force by Jaron Wharton Public Policy Duke University Date

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I Three Essays on Decisions to Use Military Force by Jaron Wharton Public Policy Duke University Date Three Essays on Decisions to Use Military Force by Jaron Wharton Public Policy Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Bruce Jentleson, Supervisor ___________________________ Peter Feaver ___________________________ David Rohde ___________________________ Bruce Kuniholm Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Public Policy in the Graduate School oF Duke University 2018 i v ABSTRACT Three Essays on Decisions to Use Military Force by Jaron Wharton Public Policy Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Bruce Jentleson, Supervisor ___________________________ Peter Feaver ___________________________ David Rohde ___________________________ Bruce Kuniholm An abstract oF a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Public Policy in the Graduate School oF Duke University 2018 Copyright by Jaron Wharton 2018 Abstract There are a multitude of influences on presidential decisions to use military force -- pre-tenure life experiences, domestic politics, and so on. The three papers that comprise this dissertation, each formatted as separate journal articles, are linked thematically and interrogate the impact of such variables. The First article, entitled “To Underpin or Undermine? Interbranch Relations and the Use of Military Force,” provides an overview of extant literature in the field. Interdisciplinary scholarship provides insight into the influence of interbranch politics on decisions to use military Force in the American context. To appreciate this influence, however, requires an understanding of the changing relationship between the executive and legislative branches of government and the impact of public opinion on both branches of government. This review Finds that our understanding of these Factors is incomplete and requires further study. Interpretations of war poWers between the two branches, for example, have evolved From their original conception in the Constitution, creating a perception of a power imbalance betWeen them. Because this view (however valid) raises questions of accountability, Further scrutiny of the perceived imbalance is warranted. Equally important, since history demonstrates that politics do not stop at the water’s edge, is the inFluence oF public opinion. Manipulated public opinion especially becomes an important, but not Well-understood, variable in a complicated give-and-take iv that involves both branches in their response to, and capacity to shape, public opinion -- a dynamic that could be construed as either underpinning or undermining America’s democracy. The second article, “Toward an Understanding of American Presidents’ Decisions to Use Military Force,” builds on the literature that traces liFe experiences to these decisions, and provides evidence that leader-centric explanations and system- centric explanations are not mutually exclusive. It speciFically complements research by Horowitz et al. (2015), who explore the biographical traits that contribute to a world leader’s “risk” score -- an index For the narrow choice to enter an interstate conflict. The article identifies the features that drive American presidents’ (1945-2000) riskiness and refines HoroWitz et al.’s measurement of leader risk. The revised risk scores diFFer From the assessments of surveyed historians, and an explanation is provided by examining an outlying case, President Jimmy Carter and the Iran hostage crisis. Finally, the third article entitled “The Essence of Reporting: Why Presidents Notify Congress Consistent with The War PoWers Resolution (WPR),” takes a closer look at a laW designed to constrain a president’s ability to use military Force and encourage greater coordination betWeen the executive and legislative branches of government regarding the initiation of hostilities. Since its passage in 1973, the WPR appears to have mostly become an administrative notiFication process that preserves a president’s authority to deploy troops For combat For extended periods of time Without v requiring the type of Congressional consultation originally envisioned in the statute. While this has been Well-documented in existing literature, another question is Worth exploring: Why are there times When presidents go along With reporting requirements and other times when they do not? Indeed, presidents frequently, but do not always, report to Congress consistent with the WPR’s provisions (specifically the 48-hour notiFication requirement and the 60-day deployment threshold absent subsequent authorization). This article seeks to investigate this inconsistent record to determine what circumstances make presidents more or less likely to comply. To do so, it employs a novel dataset of both WPR-related presidential notifications and non-notiFications from 1973-2014. Doing so reveals a key aspect of interbranch politics that underpins decisions to use military Force, namely, that presidents appear to abide by the laW When the political benefits exceed the political costs. vi Dedication For April, Logan, and Sophie, whose patience I tested throughout this process and Whose love and support Was needed to complete it. Thank you For giving me the time needed for this project -- I will spend the rest of my life paying it back it to you. vii Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... x List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. xii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... xiii Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1. To Underpin or to Undermine? Interbranch Relations and the Use oF Military Force ..................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 OvervieW ...................................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 6 1.3 The American Way of War -- From the Theoretical to a Pragmatic Interpretation of War Powers ...................................................................... 8 1.4 The Dynamic Relationship BetWeen the Executive and Legislative Branches ....................................................................................................... 22 1.5 The Curious Role of Public Opinion ...................................................................... 31 1.6 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 41 Chapter 2. Toward an Understanding oF American Presidents’ Decisions to Use Military Force ................................................................................................................... 47 2.1 Overview .................................................................................................................... 47 2.2 Tracing LiFe Experiences to Policy Outcomes ...................................................... 54 2.3 An Alternative Model .............................................................................................. 69 2.4 Contrasting Assessments oF Riskiness ................................................................... 96 2.5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 154 viii Chapter 3. The Essence oF Reporting: Why Presidents NotiFy Congress Consistent with the War Powers Resolution ......................................................................... 163 3.1 Overview .................................................................................................................. 163 3.2 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 164 3.3 Interpretation of the WPR ..................................................................................... 166 3.4 Toward an Understanding of WPR NotiFication and Compliance .................................................................................................................... 175 3.5 Methodology ........................................................................................................... 182 3.6 Data Analysis .......................................................................................................... 200 3.7 Conclusions and Possible Research Extensions ................................................. 213 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 221 Appendix A. Survey Questions and Results as oF November 29, 2016 ............................ 224 Appendix B. Supplemental Figures and Tables ................................................................... 226 Appendix C. Timeline oF the Iran Hostage Crisis
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Regime Change Consensus: Iraq in American Politics, 1990-2003
    THE REGIME CHANGE CONSENSUS: IRAQ IN AMERICAN POLITICS, 1990-2003 Joseph Stieb A dissertation submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the College of Arts and Sciences. Chapel Hill 2019 Approved by: Wayne Lee Michael Morgan Benjamin Waterhouse Daniel Bolger Hal Brands ©2019 Joseph David Stieb ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Joseph David Stieb: The Regime Change Consensus: Iraq in American Politics, 1990-2003 (Under the direction of Wayne Lee) This study examines the containment policy that the United States and its allies imposed on Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War and argues for a new understanding of why the United States invaded Iraq in 2003. At the core of this story is a political puzzle: Why did a largely successful policy that mostly stripped Iraq of its unconventional weapons lose support in American politics to the point that the policy itself became less effective? I argue that, within intellectual and policymaking circles, a claim steadily emerged that the only solution to the Iraqi threat was regime change and democratization. While this “regime change consensus” was not part of the original containment policy, a cohort of intellectuals and policymakers assembled political support for the idea that Saddam’s personality and the totalitarian nature of the Baathist regime made Iraq uniquely immune to “management” strategies like containment. The entrenchment of this consensus before 9/11 helps explain why so many politicians, policymakers, and intellectuals rejected containment after 9/11 and embraced regime change and invasion.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pulitzer Prizes for International Reporting in the Third Phase of Their Development, 1963-1977
    INTRODUCTION THE PULITZER PRIZES FOR INTERNATIONAL REPORTING IN THE THIRD PHASE OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT, 1963-1977 Heinz-Dietrich Fischer The rivalry between the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R. having shifted, in part, to predomi- nance in the fields of space-travel and satellites in the upcoming space age, thus opening a new dimension in the Cold War,1 there were still existing other controversial issues in policy and journalism. "While the colorful space competition held the forefront of public atten- tion," Hohenberg remarks, "the trained diplomatic correspondents of the major newspa- pers and wire services in the West carried on almost alone the difficult and unpopular East- West negotiations to achieve atomic control and regulation and reduction of armaments. The public seemed to want to ignore the hard fact that rockets capable of boosting people into orbit for prolonged periods could also deliver atomic warheads to any part of the earth. It continued, therefore, to be the task of the responsible press to assign competent and highly trained correspondents to this forbidding subject. They did not have the glamor of TV or the excitement of a space shot to focus public attention on their work. Theirs was the responsibility of obliging editors to publish material that was complicated and not at all easy for an indifferent public to grasp. It had to be done by abandoning the familiar cliches of journalism in favor of the care and the art of the superior historian .. On such an assignment, no correspondent was a 'foreign' correspondent. The term was outdated.
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Summer Newsletter
    Federal Bar Association Capitol Hill Chapter CAPITOL ASSETS Summer, 2009 INSIDE THIS ISSUE: J USTICE SOUTER SHARES A President’s Letter 2 S TORIED CAREER Greenberger Recap With warmth and humor Justice O’Connor has a very 3 that belied so much of the welcoming voice, teased Justice Letter to New Members 4 popular image of him as re- Souter, “when she is not chas- served and aloof, Justice David tising you about something.” of Congress (reprinted) Souter charmed and engaged He also told his listeners how DeWitt Recap 5 the guests at the chapter’s an- Justice Blackmun unexpectedly nual Supreme Court luncheon came to his chambers a couple Notable Notes 5 on May 12th. Saying he had of months into Justice Souter’s no speech but instead “just first term. “We didn’t have some stories” to tell, Justice time to visit each other, the Facebook Page 6 Paul Vamvas and Justice Souter Souter led his audience behind workload didn’t allow it.” But Ethics Symposium 6 the formal façade of the Court Justice Blackmun put his hand ference (between Felix Frank- and showed a bit of the humor on Justice Souter’s shoulder furter and William O. Doug- Donaldson Recap 7 and heart of both the institu- and said, “This is your first las). “That’s once in the fifty tion and its people. term. I remember my first years between Bill Brennan’s Upcoming Events 8 He told of being “tracked term. I know what you are time on the court and mine. down” by Justice O’Connor no going through.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS ANNUAL REPORT July 1,1996-June 30,1997 Main Office Washington Office The Harold Pratt House 1779 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. 58 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10021 Washington, DC 20036 Tel. (212) 434-9400; Fax (212) 861-1789 Tel. (202) 518-3400; Fax (202) 986-2984 Website www. foreignrela tions. org e-mail publicaffairs@email. cfr. org OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS, 1997-98 Officers Directors Charlayne Hunter-Gault Peter G. Peterson Term Expiring 1998 Frank Savage* Chairman of the Board Peggy Dulany Laura D'Andrea Tyson Maurice R. Greenberg Robert F Erburu Leslie H. Gelb Vice Chairman Karen Elliott House ex officio Leslie H. Gelb Joshua Lederberg President Vincent A. Mai Honorary Officers Michael P Peters Garrick Utley and Directors Emeriti Senior Vice President Term Expiring 1999 Douglas Dillon and Chief Operating Officer Carla A. Hills Caryl R Haskins Alton Frye Robert D. Hormats Grayson Kirk Senior Vice President William J. McDonough Charles McC. Mathias, Jr. Paula J. Dobriansky Theodore C. Sorensen James A. Perkins Vice President, Washington Program George Soros David Rockefeller Gary C. Hufbauer Paul A. Volcker Honorary Chairman Vice President, Director of Studies Robert A. Scalapino Term Expiring 2000 David Kellogg Cyrus R. Vance Jessica R Einhorn Vice President, Communications Glenn E. Watts and Corporate Affairs Louis V Gerstner, Jr. Abraham F. Lowenthal Hanna Holborn Gray Vice President and Maurice R. Greenberg Deputy National Director George J. Mitchell Janice L. Murray Warren B. Rudman Vice President and Treasurer Term Expiring 2001 Karen M. Sughrue Lee Cullum Vice President, Programs Mario L. Baeza and Media Projects Thomas R.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs
    The Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training Foreign Affairs Oral History Project L. MICHAEL RIVES Interviewed by: Charles Stuart Kennedy Initial interview date: July 25, 1995 Copyright 1998 ADST TABLE OF CONTENTS Background Born in New York City - Raised in New Jersey Princeton University U.S. Marines, ,orld ,ar II .ntered the Foreign Service -19 1901 Frankfurt, 2ermany - Refugee Relief 1901-1901 Bonn, 2ermany 1901-1902 Hanoi, 4ietnam - Political Officer 1902-1903 4ice Consul - visa officer and political reporter 4iet Minh - siege environment French military 4ientiane, 6aos 1903-1900 Officer in charge - contacts Royal family The French Communists CIA activity 2uatemala City, 2uatemala - Political officer 1900-1907 6ocal culture and society United Fruit Co. Paris, France 1907-1981 Ambassador:s aide De 2aulle takes over Ambassador Armour:s relations with Dulles and .isenhower McCarthy era 1 State Department - Director for Central African countries 1981-1983 "Soapy" ,illiams and Africa policy U.S. interests Soviet influence Brazzaville, Congo - DCM and Chargé 1983-1988 Bad relations - Soviet and Chinese influence .mbassy closed Bujumbura, Burundi - Chargé 1988-1988 Arab attacks on U.S. .mbassy (Six day warA Hutu and Tutsis Buiet Soviet and Chinese presence State Department - Senior Seminar 1988-1989 Toured U.S. Phnom Penh, Cambodia - Chargé 1989-1971 Sihanouk - U.S. attitude toward U.S. bombings American .agle episode - U.S. arms Coup against Sihanouk U.S. incursion - 1971 4ietnamese activities in Cambodia ixon Doctrine Ballooning embassy 2eneral Haig visit 4ice President Agnew visit 6on Nol Secret Service operations State Department - Chief, African Affairs I R 1971-1972 State Department - 6aos and Cambodian Affairs 1972-197C "Mayaguez incident" Henry Dissinger Djakarta, Indonesia - Deputy Chief of Mission 1970-1978 Human Rights issue Congressional visit Diplomat in Residence, Rollins College 1978-1979 Montreal, Canada - Consul 2eneral 2 Separatist sentiment Retirement and reflection INTERVIEW Q: Today is July 25, 1995.
    [Show full text]
  • Fall2011.Pdf
    Grove Press Atlantic Monthly Press Black Cat The Mysterious Press Granta Fall 201 1 NOW AVAILABLE Complete and updated coverage by The New York Times about WikiLeaks and their controversial release of diplomatic cables and war logs OPEN SECRETS WikiLeaks, War, and American Diplomacy The New York Times Introduction by Bill Keller • Essential, unparalleled coverage A New York Times Best Seller from the expert writers at The New York Times on the hundreds he controversial antisecrecy organization WikiLeaks, led by Julian of thousands of confidential Assange, made headlines around the world when it released hundreds of documents revealed by WikiLeaks thousands of classified U.S. government documents in 2010. Allowed • Open Secrets also contains a T fascinating selection of original advance access, The New York Times sorted, searched, and analyzed these secret cables and war logs archives, placed them in context, and played a crucial role in breaking the WikiLeaks story. • online promotion at Open Secrets, originally published as an e-book, is the essential collection www.nytimes.com/opensecrets of the Times’s expert reporting and analysis, as well as the definitive chronicle of the documents’ release and the controversy that ensued. An introduction by Times executive editor, Bill Keller, details the paper’s cloak-and-dagger “We may look back at the war logs as relationship with a difficult source. Extended profiles of Assange and Bradley a herald of the end of America’s Manning, the Army private suspected of being his source, offer keen insight engagement in Afghanistan, just as into the main players. Collected news stories offer a broad and deep view into the Pentagon Papers are now a Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the messy challenges facing American power milestone in our slo-mo exit from in Europe, Russia, Asia, the Middle East, and Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • More Revelations About Mayaguez (And Its Secret Cargo) Jordan J
    Boston College International and Comparative Law Review Volume 4 | Issue 1 Article 4 5-1-1981 More Revelations About Mayaguez (and its Secret Cargo) Jordan J. Paust Follow this and additional works at: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/iclr Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Jordan J. Paust, More Revelations About Mayaguez (and its Secret Cargo), 4 B.C. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 61 (1981), http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/iclr/vol4/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College International and Comparative Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. More Revelations About Mayaguez (and its Secret Cargo) by Jordan]. Paust· PAUST ON THE MAYAGUEZ: EDITORS' INTRODUCTION·· In May 1975, the u.s. merchant ship Mayaguez was held captive by forces of the Cambodian Government for three days. The incident has produced a lively controversy among international legal scholars. Professor Jordan Paust of the University of Houston has written extensively over the last few years on the issues presented by the Mayaguez incident. In 1976, Professor Paust discussed the legality of governmental actions surrounding the Mayaguez incident. His analysis elicited a critical response from the State Department. The ensuing debate is con­ tinued here. The present article examines the litigation engendered by the incident. Such litigation in­ volves suits brought by crew members of the Mayaguez against the owner of the merchant vessel and against the U.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origins of the Imperial Presidency and the Framework for Executive Power, 1933-1960
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Dissertations Graduate College 4-2013 Building A House of Peace: The Origins of the Imperial Presidency and the Framework for Executive Power, 1933-1960 Katherine Elizabeth Ellison Western Michigan University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations Part of the Political History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Ellison, Katherine Elizabeth, "Building A House of Peace: The Origins of the Imperial Presidency and the Framework for Executive Power, 1933-1960" (2013). Dissertations. 138. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/138 This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BUILDING A HOUSE OF PEACE: THE ORIGINS OF THE IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY AND THE FRAMEWORK FOR EXECUTIVE POWER, 1933-1960 by Katherine Elizabeth Ellison A dissertation submitted to the Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History Western Michigan University April 2013 Doctoral Committee: Edwin A. Martini, Ph.D., Chair Sally E. Hadden, Ph.D. Mark S. Hurwitz, Ph.D. Kathleen G. Donohue, Ph.D. BUILDING A HOUSE OF PEACE: THE ORIGINS OF THE IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY AND THE FRAMEWORK FOR EXECUTIVE POWER, 1933-1960 Katherine Elizabeth Ellison, Ph.D. Western Michigan University, 2013 This project offers a fundamental rethinking of the origins of the imperial presidency, taking an interdisciplinary approach as perceived through the interactions of the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches of government during the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s.
    [Show full text]
  • American War and Military Operations Casualties: Lists and Statistics
    American War and Military Operations Casualties: Lists and Statistics Updated July 29, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL32492 American War and Military Operations Casualties: Lists and Statistics Summary This report provides U.S. war casualty statistics. It includes data tables containing the number of casualties among American military personnel who served in principal wars and combat operations from 1775 to the present. It also includes data on those wounded in action and information such as race and ethnicity, gender, branch of service, and cause of death. The tables are compiled from various Department of Defense (DOD) sources. Wars covered include the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the Mexican War, the Civil War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam Conflict, and the Persian Gulf War. Military operations covered include the Iranian Hostage Rescue Mission; Lebanon Peacekeeping; Urgent Fury in Grenada; Just Cause in Panama; Desert Shield and Desert Storm; Restore Hope in Somalia; Uphold Democracy in Haiti; Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF); Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF); Operation New Dawn (OND); Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR); and Operation Freedom’s Sentinel (OFS). Starting with the Korean War and the more recent conflicts, this report includes additional detailed information on types of casualties and, when available, demographics. It also cites a number of resources for further information, including sources of historical statistics on active duty military deaths, published lists of military personnel killed in combat actions, data on demographic indicators among U.S. military personnel, related websites, and relevant CRS reports. Congressional Research Service American War and Military Operations Casualties: Lists and Statistics Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Government for a Digital Economy 77
    EDITED BY NICHOLAS BURNS AND JONATHON PRICE CONTRIBUTORS INCLUDE: Graham Allision; Zoë Baird; Robert D. Blackwill; Nicholas Burns; James Cartwright; John Dowdy; Peter Feaver; Niall Ferguson; Stephen Hadley; Jennifer M. Harris; Christopher Kirchhoff; Jane Holl Lute; Joseph S. Nye; Thomas Pritzker; Kirk Rieckhoff; John Sawers; Julianne Smith; James Steinberg; Douglas Stuart; Dov Zakheim; Leah Joy Zell Copyright © 2016 by The Aspen Institute The Aspen Institute One Dupont Circle, N.W. Suite 700 Washington, DC 20036 Published in the United States of America in 2016 by The Aspen Institute All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 0-89843-650-8 Wye Publication Number: 16/013 Cover design by: Steve Johnson Interior layout by: Sogand Sepassi aspen strategy group CHAIR EMERITUS MEMBERS Brent Scowcroft Madeleine K. Albright President Chair The Scowcroft Group, Inc. Albright Stonebridge Group Graham Allison CO-CHAIR Director Belfer Center for Science and Joseph S. Nye, Jr. International Affairs University Distinguished Service Professor John F. Kennedy School of Government John F. Kennedy School of Government Harvard University Harvard University Zoë Baird CEO and President DIRECTOR Markle Foundation Nicholas Burns Stephen Biegun Goodman Family Professor of Diplomacy Vice President and International Relations Ford Motor Company John F. Kennedy School of Government Harvard University Robert D. Blackwill Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow for U.S. Foreign Policy DEPUTY DIRECTOR Council on Foreign Relations Jonathon Price Kurt Campbell Deputy Director Chairman and CEO Aspen Strategy Group The Asia Group, LLC James E. Cartwright Harold Brown Chair in Defense Policy Studies ASPEN INSTITUTE PRESIDENT Center for Strategic and International Studies Walter Isaacson Eliot Cohen President and CEO Robert E.
    [Show full text]
  • POTUS and Pot: Why the President Could Not Legalize Marijuana Through Executive Action
    University of Cincinnati Law Review Volume 89 Issue 3 The John Murphy Memorial Issue Article 3 April 2021 POTUS and Pot: Why the President Could Not Legalize Marijuana Through Executive Action Robert Mikos Vanderbilt University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/uclr Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Agriculture Law Commons, Criminal Law Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Robert Mikos, POTUS and Pot: Why the President Could Not Legalize Marijuana Through Executive Action, 89 U. Cin. L. Rev. 668 (2021) Available at: https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/uclr/vol89/iss3/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Cincinnati Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Mikos: POTUS and Pot POTUS AND POT: WHY THE PRESIDENT COULD NOT LEGALIZE MARIJUANA THROUGH EXECUTIVE ACTION Robert A. Mikos* Could the President legalize marijuana, without waiting for Congress to act? The 2020 Presidential Election showed that this question is far from hypothetical. Seeking to capitalize on frustration with the slow pace of federal legislative reform, several presidential candidates promised they would bypass the logjam in Congress and legalize marijuana through executive action instead. This Essay warns that such promises are both misguided and dangerous because they ignore statutory and constitutional constraints on the President’s authority to effect legal change.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2013
    ANNUAL REPORT 2013 2013 ANNUAL REPORT | 1 Dear Friends, At The Sentencing Project we view our work on justice reform as having three components – research, public education, and advocacy. During 2013 I believe we made substantial progress in all these areas, and contributed to the changing national climate for reform. Our research documented both disturbing trends and signs of hope. Our analysis of life imprisonment uncovered the striking fact that one of every nine people in prison is serving such a sentence. We also identified an intriguing shift in the racial dynamics of incarceration, particularly among women, noting that the black/white disparity ratio had been cut in half in the first decade of this century. And we found that there is a The Sentencing Project works for a fair and continuing trend of states closing prisons, with 17 doing so over the past three years. Each of these policy effective U.S. justice system by promoting reports received national press coverage and helped to launch a dialogue around the factors contributing to reforms in sentencing policy, addressing these developments. unjust racial disparities and practices, and Our public education work is ongoing, and takes place both at a national and a local level. We’re quite proud advocating for alternatives to incarceration. that our policy analyses and commentary are regularly featured in national media and editorial commentary. But we also place great value in working with policymakers and advocates around the country, as well as The image on pages 16 and 17 is a photograph delivering conference and workshop presentations to a wide variety of audiences each year.
    [Show full text]