Constitutional War Powers: Thomas Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates

When President Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801, he inherited a problem in the Mediterranean--pirates kept hijacking US merchant ships and demanding ransom. Abraham D. Sofaer of the Hoover Institution explains how Jefferson dealt with the Barbary pirates and how his actions should inform our thinking about separation of powers as it relates to issues of war.

As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speaker.

Related Links & Differing Views:

The First Barbary War:

Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates:

Clear Statement Rules and Executive War Powers [Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy]

The War Powers Resolution doesn’t let the president start wars [The Hill]

War Powers Belong to the President [ABA Journal]

Constitutional War Powers: Executive Authority in the War on Terror:

Constitutional War Power: The Founders' Framework:

[sebastianhugely]

He spoke to a Ottoman emissary in London. Asking why he thought the had the right to attack American merchant’s?
The emissary said “Because you’re infidels” At which point Jefferson said “hold my coat!”

[BallyBoy]

Thomas Jefferson is clearly a true leader, and actually took the initiative to sort out its troubles, contrary to many modern leaders today.

[Ivan.A.Trollyouski]

“Sometimes even put them in slavery.” More like for 300 years they raided the coasts England, Scotland and Ireland capturing over 1, 000, 000 people from the British isles and made them into slaves.

[SheronEvon-kpbl]

Religion of peace is always making troubles.

[dweebschlemiel]

I guess Jefferson wasn't a sellout, unlike our stupid leaders nowadays.

[johnedwards]

If there was nothing iffy about Jefferson's dispatching the fleet to the MediterIranian, then why did he do it when Congress was out of session and did not inform Congress until the fleet was well beyond the point where it could be recalled? Not everyone in Congress at the time thought Jefferson had acted within his authorized powers.

[JoanoftheArk]

1000 years of persecution before the crusades began

[jamesruscheinski]

the constitutional responsibilities of the president to appoint and receive ambassadors and diplomats for enforcing treaties, while Congress has constitutional power to conduct foreign policy, which declaration of war is part of

[matthewmann]

Yup taken on ships, boats, rafts, yaughts, canoes, and kayaks

[salamanor]

Why didn't you mentioned how did the pirate movement start? Why didn't you mentioned the commercial boycott exerced by europe on the country of the southern rive of mediterranean?

[Ecosse]

"Constitutional War Powers: Thomas Jefferson and Orthodox Muslims." fify

[buildacademy]

What he left out was the Treaty of Murrakush, which granted American vessels protection in the Mediterranean against Algeria and Tunisia, and Morocco didn't fall under the Ottomans.

[jamesruscheinski]

the president was making powers as commander in chiefs enforces treaties with other nations, and the constitution for federal government

[candyjay]

Listen to what they say, but pay close attention to what they didn't say.

[jamesruscheinski]

the power to declare war is part of foreign policy; with the power to declare war, Congress has constitutional power to conduct foreign policy (which would be in line with democratic and republican principles)

[enginetruck]

Thanks for not clearing up a dang thing.

[elbadboy]

Wow! thank you for teaching us about our history, nice, I love it, Thomas Jefferson big contribution to our Nation

[EternalMedia]

Funny how it's called "Tribute or "Ransom"... Couldn't it just as easily have been called a tariff?

[franktatom]

This gentleman is wrong in his interpretation of the Constitution in regard to the power of the President to use the armed forces. Jefferson's actions in fighting the Barbary pirates were beyond his Constitutional powers by any reasonable interpretation of the Constitution. The fact that his actions were approved, or not disapproved, after the fact is irrelevant on what the Constitution allows. And it does not allow the President to unilaterally engage in war to any extent.

Woe to the republic which allows its executive to take it into war alone because that isn't a representative republic.

[alykkt]

muslims, turks, arabs. very noble people!