David Barron & Marty Lederman have published a new article on war powers, The Commander In Chief At The Lowest Ebb — Framing The Problem, Doctrine, And Original Understanding. From the introduction:

This Article. . . is the first of a two-part effort to determine how the constitutional argument for preclusive executive war powers, now being pressed so boldly, is best conceived. Is it properly understood to be rooted in fidelity to the founding generation? Does it reflect instead the principles established by a longstanding constitutional tradition that, although concededly at odds with that early understanding, has emerged over time as exigencies presented themselves? Or is it instead dependent on the stark contention that the world has changed, due to either the advent of nuclear weapons or the rise of terrorism, in such a way as to render obsolete and intolerable the constitutional mechanisms for checking the Commander in Chief that earlier generations consistently accepted?

The conclusion: The Bush Administration's constitutional vision is all about a living, breathing Article II.