If no judicial court of authority, namely the united states supreme court, has stricken the 1973 war powers act and declared it null and void constitutionally, how is it that the authors of the text book are able to conclude congress has few, if any, war powers remaining? how can this be? the law is the law, is it not? (specifically, explain the political phenomenon that has occurred here and has similarly occurred in other legal and constitutional matters allowing the law to be ignored.)

The textbook’s authors are correct to conclude that Congress only has few, if there is any, powers remaining. Congress hasn’t declared war since 1941 of December, clearly presenting that Congress has no control over whether United States can go to war. One major reason that Congress is in this situation is because the president claims that that he inherent the sole executive power to defend America’s interest. Another major reason for Congress lack of war power is because of Truman.

the right answer for the question that is being asked and shown above is that: "their policy of "divide and rule" pitted political groups against each other to keep any one group from becoming too powerful.  " the  participant in european imperialism is being described below is that  their policy of "divide and rule" pitted political groups against each other to keep any one group from becoming too powerful.