Is It Time to Roll Back the 9/11-Era Rules on the War on Terrorism?

The House Armed Services Committee will begin it’s mark-up of the 424 page-Defense Authorization Bill it released Monday, which apportions $527 billion to various military needs but has raised some eyebrows in its language that seeks to roll back the 9/11-era rules of war on terrorism, The Hill reports.

The bill will require the President to notify Congress each time a “kill/capture” operation is launched as well as “force the Pentagon and White House to review all groups or individuals now characterized as 'associated forces' under the 9/11 counter terrorism rules, known on Capitol Hill as the Authorization of the Use of Military Force (AUMF).”

Critics argue that following 9/11 the Executive Branch was granted unprecedented power and leeway when it comes to conducting the War on Terror – power the Executive Branch promises to use judiciously. As recently as a week and a half ago the President said that drone strikes were going to be more restrained and targeted toward Al Qaeda forces, yet six days later Taliban leaders in Pakistan were targeted.  Are they “associated”?  Would restraining the President’s (and future presidents') power change the way we conduct the war on terror? Is that a good thing? Former terror prosecutor Andrew McCarthy joined 'Real News' to discuss Congress’s push to update the Authorization for Use of Military Force.