Probably to keep the power with the people... so they could vote for the individual with the most influence with our military.
The technicality is in the title within your question. The US President is the civilian "commander in Chief" of the US Armed Forces as stated in the US Constitution, however, during NATO supported conflicts, in the past, there has been a military position of Supreme Commander of NATO forces, which reports to the US President and NATO.
president
The President is the Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces.
None. The President is a civilian, even if Commander In Chief of the Armed Forces.
Commander in chief
This power is granted by the US Constitution. The writers wanted all military forces to be under the civilian control of the elected President.
The US President, per the Constitution, is the Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces
As explicitly stated in the US Constitution, the president is Commander in Chief of the US armed forces.
Per the Constitution, the President of the US is the Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces
In the US, the elected official who is, per the US Constitution, the Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces is the President.
The president's relationship with the armed forces is that he is the commander in chief. This is a power that is expressed to him by the constitution.
Since the constitution names the President as the commander-in-chief of all military forces, the home is the White House.
The US Constitution specifies that the President is the commander-in-chief of US military forces.
Yes, It States it article two of the US Constitution.
yes it states that in article two of the us constitution
Yes. The Constitution makes the President the commander-on-chief of all US military forces.
The President is, under the Constitution, the commander in chief of the armed forces. He also has the power to appoint judges and other officials and has the power to veto legislation.