Legal Argument

Lesson 5 Journal Prompt
Your “journal entry” for this lesson’s journal will take the form of a written legal argument on behalf of an assigned client. The hypothetical facts leading to your argument and the assignment requirements follow.

Hypothetical Facts: In June 2021, General Ted Lasso, long-time dictator of the nation of Richmond, began using force against peaceful revolutionaries who were engaged in a non-violent “bloodless uprising” against his dictatorship in Richmond. Lasso authorized use of force against unarmed civilians in regions of the country loyal to the revolutionaries. In response to that authorization, some civilians armed themselves and began fighting back against Richmond Army units loyal to Lasso. The administration of US President Sharon Fieldstone publicly expressed outrage at Lasso’s actions. The US Ambassador to the United Nations proposed a resolution to the UN Security Council seeking to end the bloodshed in Richmond and promote a democratic government there. On 17 September 2021, the UN Security Council passed a resolution authorizing a no-fly zone and the use of “all necessary measures” to protect civilians from attacks by proLasso forces. The resolution did not

Military Order 1: President Fieldstone immediately ordered the US military’s participation in enforcing the no-fly zone, and those operations began on 18 September 2021. French and German air forces took the lead in the air-to-air no-fly zone enforcement; US no-fly zone enforcement activities were limited to the use of the remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) known as the Reaper, which was armed with air-to-air Stinger missiles. Use of Stinger missiles on Reapers turned out to be ineffective, and the Reaper recorded no kills during operations over Richmond. On 19 September 2021, President Fieldstone sent a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the Majority Leader of the Senate, stating “consistent with principles of good government and the desire of Congress to be informed as indicated in the War Powers Resolution, I write to advise you that yesterday I ordered US RPA units to assist with the UN Security Council’s resolution authorizing a no fly zone over Richmond and protecting civilians from attack by pro-Lasso forces.”

Military Order 2: On 18 September, President Fieldstone also ordered US participation in protection of civilians on the ground. Specifically, she ordered use of RPAs (Predators and Reapers armed with Hellfire missiles and GBU-38 bombs). According to US intelligence, US RPAs accounted for approximately 400 Richmond Army casualties and the destruction of at least 40 Richmond Army vehicles (tanks and trucks). All RPAs were operated by US Air Force officers sitting at Creech AFB in Nevada.

Military Order 3: On 15 December 2021, revolutionaries successfully overthrew Lasso, capturing and executing him immediately. On 21 December 2021, President Fieldstone ordered United States “rule of law” forces into the country at the invitation of the new transitional government. The rule of law forces consisted of uniformed judge advocates and paralegals from the US Army who advised the interim government, including its court system, on rule of law issues. The rule of law forces are armed with personal defensive weapons (sidearms and rifles) only, are not permitted to leave the capital city (Beardville), and their Rules of Engagement specifically state they may only use force to defend themselves. Since their arrival on 21 December, on five occasions the rule of law forces have come under attack by forces loyal to the old regime as they transitioned to courthouses in the capital city. The US service members returned fire, but it is unknown whether they inflicted any damage on their attackers. Two US service members were killed in these attacks. On 29 December, the Senate Majority Leader sent a letter to the President expressing his outrage that the President had introduced ground forces into the dangerous Richmond situation without the authorization of Congress and without even consulting with Congress under the War Powers Resolution. President Fieldstone has not responded. On 29 January, Congress passed a joint resolution saying “no appropriated funds may be used for US military operations in or over Richmond. President Fieldstone vetoed the bill 5 minutes after it arrived on her desk.

Military Order 4: In the last few weeks, remnants of General Lasso’s army, which had fled to the southern part of the country (away from the capital), have started conducting military operations against towns there. Pro-Lasso forces have seized a few towns in the South and are starting to increase the range and ferocity of their attacks. From this area those forces have launched attacks on the new government forces and threaten to return Richmond to civil war. To avoid this, on 9 February 2021, President Fieldstone ordered the US to resume using armed RPAs as close air support for the new Richmondian military. As President Fieldstone announced to the American public (via Twitter) “we WON’T ALLOW Richmond to fall back into dictatorship, so I’m ordering USAF to help the new Richmondian military. WE WILL WIN!!”

Argument
Congress has sued President Fieldstone, arguing that her orders were unconstitutional and that she has violated the War Powers Resolution. Based on your assigned group (see below), you are representing either the President or Congress in the lawsuit. You will make a written legal argument regarding your assigned issue(s). Do not make any arguments regarding justiciability – focus on the assigned substantive issue(s). Regardless of your Group assignment, your argument, which you will submit as part of your Block 1 journal, must be at least 500 words long. It is entirely possible it will need to be significantly longer. If there are facts you think you need to know not presented above, state that. So long as you don’t make up contradictory facts, you may also make reasonable assumptions to fill in the gaps of the facts – just state that that’s what you’re doing.

Assignments
Your assignment depends on which group you are in, based on your last name. Here are the group #s: Group 1

Group 1 assignment: representing the President, argue why the President had legal authority for the four orders and argue that the WPR is an unconstitutional restriction on the President’s authority. Your argument that the President had legal authority for the four orders must include at least two different theories of legal authority (at least one of which must be a theory based on a specific constitutional provision) and must cite at least three cases about which you’ve read during Block 1 of the course.
Cases during block 1:
– Little v. Barreme
The Prize Cases
Curtiss-Wright
Youngstown Sheet & Tube v. Sawyer
Zivotofsky v. Kerry
Curtiss-Wright, Chadha, and Lichter.
Dames & Moore v. Regan
Orlando v. Laird