Charles B. Koch Fellows program hosts debate between two law professors
As part of the Koch Lecture Series, the Charles B. Koch Fellows program hosted a debate between John Yoo of Berkeley Law and Alberto Coll of the DePaul College of Law last Tuesday in the Los Angeles Pacific Board Room (LAPC). The lecture, “Congress, the President and War Powers: a Debate,” was filled with political science students and faculty members.
Yoo and Coll each had 15 minutes to present their stance on whether or not the president should have executive power to initiate wars, or if Congress should share responsibility of that power. Yoo argued the president has the constitutional right to execute wars, while Coll argued it should be a decision that goes through Congress.
“The president has the power to act swiftly and decisively with energy,” Yoo argued. He then went on to explain Alexander Hamilton’s purpose for the role of presidents as described in the Federalist Papers.
“Hamilton said in the Federalist Papers that one of two duties of the president is to execute the laws at home, and the second one is to defend the country from attack,” Yoo said. “I think that understanding is what has influenced our presidencies and what has lead our greatest presidents in those great circumstances to act. Sometimes they make mistakes, but the framers rejected the idea of having multiple people as presidents in order to act quickly in times of emergency.”
Yoo is not only a law professor at Berkeley, but also an attorney and an author of many books. He studied law at both Harvard and Yale University.
Coll argued against the attorney’s argument that the president should not have the sole authority to initiate or declare war against any other state.
“There is nothing constitutional about the president initiating war,” Coll said. “Alexander Hamilton was a great defender of executive power, but he was very clear about who had the power to put the United States into a major war, and it was not the president. The legislature alone can declare war, the president cannot do that on his or her own.”
Aside from being a law professor, Coll was dean of the Center for Naval Warfare Studies, “the U.S. Navy’s foremost strategic research center.”
The debate was followed by a 10 minute rebuttal and a Q&A session where students were able to interact with each speaker.
Junior political science major Jocelyn Stevens was among those in attendance and shared her thoughts on the debate.
“Dr. Yoo and Dr. Alberto Coll both presented their sides upon what they think the Constitution says when it comes to the power of the President and war,” Stevens said. “They were both extremely knowledgeable and informative concerning all the factors that weigh into the power of each branch of government and how that affects war-making and war-responding decisions.”
Stevens left the debate agreeing more with Yoo’s stance.
“I think that it is within the president’s constitutional powers to make decisions concerning our national security without Congressional approval,” Stevens continued. “Often in times of crisis, the security of the nation cannot afford excessive amounts of time to pass before making a decision. If the president ran all his decisions by Congress concerning national security issues, even threats and deployment of troops before he executed any kind of act, our country might have a different story than the one we are living out today.”
She also disagreed that the president should seek out advice and approval of Congress in national security decision-making.
“This is not to say that the president can most certainly improve communication with the Legislative branch on other issues such as the implementation of the laws that govern this country,” Stevens said. “But as for the commander-in-chief, he should not have to wait for approval from Congress to take immediate action for the safety of this country.”