War.

Every lawyer should have a special interest in a huge U.S. constitutional question that apparently has received little public attention from the bar, bench, and academia since the vote of Congress in October 2002 authorizing war against Iraq.

The question is as follows: So that Congress can make a wise decision in the best interest of this country, what is the duty of care owed by the President to Congress when he asks for pre-emptive war authorization and funding for same?

I submit the President and his agents before Congress must be honest and candid in presenting all the material facts, both pro and con, on the issue. Presidential reliance on the doctrine of "caveat emptor" should not prevail.

If the President lies to Congress, he should be impeached. If he is honest and candid with Congress, then he should be honored for he has set a good precedent.

However, if the President is less than honest and candid, he should not be honored, but should be sanctioned for he has set a bad precedent. What are the available sanctions against the President for such a breach of duty?

1) Congress could rescind the authorization and/or refuse to fund the war...