Andrew Rudalevige
@rudalev.bsky.social
Bowdoin College professor of political science; affiliated with UCL's Centre on US Politics and UVa's Miller Center. Feed includes posts on presidential power, bureaucratic politics, and carping about Boston sports and European football
Vance would have been the 99th (or 100th, if Marco still insisted on voting for himself) but had of course shifted chairs by then.
November 9, 2025 at 8:16 PM
Vance would have been the 99th (or 100th, if Marco still insisted on voting for himself) but had of course shifted chairs by then.
One tiny fact check -- Marco Rubio's 99 votes for confirmation as SecState included his own. (What kind of person votes for himself in that moment, you can decide.)
November 9, 2025 at 5:50 PM
One tiny fact check -- Marco Rubio's 99 votes for confirmation as SecState included his own. (What kind of person votes for himself in that moment, you can decide.)
The argument in the piece is extraordinarily brief -- is it supposed to be the old Yoo case re "declare" being meaningless? As it stands it implies the president can wage war on literally anyone by yelling "I am CIC!" Which is, well, wrong. The US is not exactly repelling sudden attacks here.
November 7, 2025 at 9:46 PM
The argument in the piece is extraordinarily brief -- is it supposed to be the old Yoo case re "declare" being meaningless? As it stands it implies the president can wage war on literally anyone by yelling "I am CIC!" Which is, well, wrong. The US is not exactly repelling sudden attacks here.
Yes, slightly more than in passing but only slightly. It was seen originally as a way to rein in the president, by regularizing (and setting limits on) a power he had claimed was inherent and unbounded. The result was seen as permission, instead. But even so DJT has pushed past readings of the law.
November 7, 2025 at 9:37 PM
Yes, slightly more than in passing but only slightly. It was seen originally as a way to rein in the president, by regularizing (and setting limits on) a power he had claimed was inherent and unbounded. The result was seen as permission, instead. But even so DJT has pushed past readings of the law.
Reposted by Andrew Rudalevige
I believe @rudalev.bsky.social addresses it as a post-Watergate reform in The New Imperial Presidency. Just tooling around finding examples for class I found an EO from Bush invoking it as part of the war on terror.
November 7, 2025 at 4:23 PM
I believe @rudalev.bsky.social addresses it as a post-Watergate reform in The New Imperial Presidency. Just tooling around finding examples for class I found an EO from Bush invoking it as part of the war on terror.
Not with a bang, but a whimper...
November 7, 2025 at 5:50 PM
Not with a bang, but a whimper...