Below is my column in Fox.com on the move this coming week to introduce a war powers resolution to end the attacks in Iran. The task, however, will be far more challenging in light of the escalation of hostilities. With the loss of American personnel, the choice is even more stark politically for these members. President Donald Trump has left Congress with only fight or flight options.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.) promised to force a vote on a war powers resolution to bar further prosecution of the war against Iran. Republicans such as Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) have joined in the call to bar further hostilities. These members are certainly within their rights to call for such resolutions and the Framers wanted such debates to occur in Congress. However, it is too late to make this cat walk backwards. While there are good-faith reasons to oppose the commencement of the attacks, the United States is now in close combat with Iran. Drafting a war powers resolution at this stage would be nearly impossible without putting U.S. personnel and allies at risk.
The Constitution divides war powers between the legislative and executive branches. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution declares that “the President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states.” However, under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, only Congress may declare wars.
The result has been over two centuries of conflicts between presidents and Congress. Presidents are clearly authorized to respond to threats to national security by commencing military operations. Past presidents, including Democratic presidents such as President Barack Obama and Joe Biden, have asserted the unilateral power to attack other nations when they believe that combat is warranted by national security.
The War Powers Act was the response of Congress to try to curtail such unilateral authority. Overriding the veto of President Richard Nixon, Congress mandated that presidents must consult with them and cease all combat operations within 60 days if Congress has not approved the use of force. Presidents, and some academics, have long argued that the WPA is unconstitutional in part or in whole.
Now to the current conflict. The sixty-day period is likely ample for what President Donald Trump is planning for Iran since he has ruled out putting American boots on the ground in the conflict. That is why Kaine, Massie, and others are moving to cut off authorization immediately.
The problem is that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards are now launching a full-fledged attack with thousands of missiles against the United States, its assets, and its allies around the world. It has also declared that the key Strait of Hormuz is now closed — potentially choking off twenty percent of the world’s oil reserves.
So how are these members going to draft a War Powers Resolution?
The WPA requires that
“The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.”
Kaine and others insist that hostilities were not imminent when we attacked. Even if that were true, they are now. We are in a full engagement with Iran with mounting injuries and destruction. All threats are now imminent and all attacks are arguably preemptive.
WPR specifically allows for the use of force in “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.” Those attacks are now occurring.
In these circumstances, it would be nearly impossible to limit the war powers of the President without putting American personnel or allies at risk. After decapitating the leadership in Iran, Iranian assets are clearly operating under prior orders in a decentralized structure. That means that the United States must neutralize any and all assets that they can find in preemptive attacks while trying to further degrade the command structure of the Iranian government.
Is Congress going to require the United States to only act responsively, rather than preemptively, to attacks? That would be absurd from an operational standpoint.
The most a resolution could demand is the cessation of hostilities once imminent threats are removed. That would be practically meaningless given the fact that hostilities will continue so long as the current Iranian government remains in power. Both the IRG and de facto Iranian leader Ali Larijani pledged that they are now unleashing every asset against the United States and its allies. Larijani declared “They stabbed heart of the nation, their heart will be stabbed too.”
The other problem with the resolution is the glaring disconnect for Democrats from their silence in the face of Democratic presidents using the same claimed inherent authority as President Donald Trump.
President Barack Obama (and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) attacked the capital city of Libya and that country’s military assets without any imminent threat to the United States. Many of the current members were entirely silent. After calling for the rescission of the broadly interpreted 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), Biden then claimed that same authority to launch his own attacks on Iraq and Yemen.
The choice now for Democrats is either a senseless or suicidal resolution. It can either resolve to end hostilities as soon as practically possible (an objective already stated by the Administration) or it can actually seek to limit the Administration’s options amid full-fledged war.
In other words, Trump (like some of his predecessors) has boxed in Congress. Presidents are allowed to initiate hostilities, and Congress will not end them by limiting our options. The choice is now to finish the fight or flee the battlefield.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the New York Times bestselling “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
That Tim Kaine and his ilk believe the Iranian Regime’s threats were not “imminent” has been echoed over and over again in progressive media as the reason why the status quo that was should still be in place. One wonders just what exactly they understand “imminent” to mean. Surely, it does not mean only until it becomes too late to address. If sanctions and military operations like Midnight Hammer have not dissuaded the Iranian Regime from resuming further development and eventual use of nuclear weaponry to prosecute their agenda, what will? Imminence is not only what will occur next. It also entails what is most likely to occur ultimately.
Re: “ that Tim Kaine and his ilk”…
When the election results are in, do not send to know who was elected. Rather send to know who voted. Therein lies the rub. When one listens to Kaine we hear the manifestations of the soft bigotry of low expectations for the intelligence of the low information voter. The late great comedian Groucho Marx would have put it this way “I could never respect the constituency which would raise ME to high office,”
The issue here is that Congress is thinking we still face traditional wars, where belligerents face off in battlefield set pieces. We have been engaged in an asymmetric war with Iran for 47-odd years. Maybe send the members of Congress with no experience of modern war to the front.
And then there are those who think, that traditionally because we were an agrarian society sheltered by 2 vast oceans that were only traversable via sailing or steamer ships, that isolation was a winning concept. Well times, economic structures, travel, communication and trade have abolished that concept many decades ago. Why are these recalcitrant luddites still thinking this way? We can no more separate ourselves from the world than we will be able to ferret out each and every potential terrorist among us because of the obama/autopen administrations.
The asymmetry goes farther back than that, starting with the CIA overthrow of the democratically elected leader of Iran in favor of the Shah who was put into place as a dictator that would go on to make deals unfavorable to Iran but rewarding to the Shah and the US.
All they have to do is say the bill is for a anti-Trump “Call to Prayer”, co-signed by Susan Rice where Trump haters chant their hatred of all things Trump, five times a day. That bill will easily pass and Iran will be free to target the east coast – excluding Martha’s Vineyard, of course – and pummel MAGA voters at will.
Today on Meet the Press:
LINDSEY GRAHAM: Our goal is to make sure Iran cannot become again the largest state sponsor of terrorism.
WELKER: Does the president have a plan to guarantee that happens?
GRAHAM: No. It’s not his job.
So we just bomb them and hope everything works out from there.
There is no plan.
This is the fundamental problem here.
Trump and his minions have absolutely no idea what they are doing. They seem to think that they can simply bomb the crap out of Iran and the people will spontaneously rise up and miraculously become a functioning democracy, which they have never had in their entire history of thousands of years.
This is delusional thinking.
The only way for Iran to become a democracy is if the United States provides a clear pathway with advice and help. This would have required identifying possible leaders before the attack and providing advice to the Iranian people via all possible means of communication. Historically, the Voice of America radio system has been the best method to achieve this, since it is very difficult to block, unlike the internet. But as we know, Trump has completely gutted that system. It no longer exists in any meaningful or functional way.
There should now be a major propaganda campaign to rouse the Iranian people to tell them what they should do and how to take over from the existing regime, but of course Trump does not understand this and has no one else in his regime who understands this. And he has destroyed the Voice of America, the most effective way to achieve this.
The classic example of this was Truman’s efforts to remake Germany and Japan after WW2. Unlike Trump, Truman was fully aware that the US would have to take control and guide the defeated countries to a better life. He approved the Marshall plan in Europe, and appointed MacArthur to oversee the recovery of Japan.
That is the ONLY way to achieve regime change, but unfortunately the Trump regime of misfits and castoffs from television talk shows has absolutely no understanding of this.
Instead we have stooges like Lindsey Graham saying “that’s not our job”.
This entire effort is doomed to failure.
Hey. Knock it off. Even Adolf O’Casio liked Hoss Cartwright. we is japan’s nuclear umbrella for pete’s sake, (which gives them a huge tax advantage.) hell, adolf o’casio knode that maybe. she knode wher china is, 2!
wait wait wait. I GOT IT! put adolf O’casio president pro tempore of iran
“put adolf O’casio president pro tempore of iran”
Nah, my vote is for KBJ. Since she doesn’t know what a woman is, they could hardly riot over being led by one…
Since when does Lindsey Graham speak for the Trump administration? He’s merely offering his opinion on a talk show. How do you know Trump doesn’t have a plan, or that he doesn’t know what he’s doing? Are you receiving intelligence briefings? No. The only factual statement is that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about or anything that is happening. Isn’t that about right?
Turley– “Presidents are allowed to initiate hostilities, and Congress will not end them by limiting our options. The choice is now to finish the fight or flee the battlefield.”
Why do I suspect that too many in Congress would prefer that we flee and leave bloody tyrants and terrorists in charge?
Maybe Congress will even vote to send them more pallets of cash as Obama did. No wonder the SAVE Act is stalled. Could these radical lunatics even win an election without cheating? Even Somalia requires ID to vote.
Meanwhile, when did antisemitism become fashionable in Hollywood?
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2026/03/01/hollywood-celebrities-whine-after-trump-strikes-iran-distract-from-epstein-and-do-netanyahus-bidding/
We have already seen a president flee a battlefield in 2021 in Afghanistan. Does Congress now wish to show us their version. We also saw the same thing happen in Vietnam.
The President did consult the gang of 8 (leaders of both parties) prior to hostilities.
Apparently the strikes were moved up when intelligence suggested a large meeting of the Ayatollah and most of his key advisers was taking place and apparently in his own compound. An astounding breach of planning and craft to arrange such a meeting when war was close and knowing they were the pre-eminent targets. Any military planning for a conflict would look upon this as a gift and apparently was.
Israeli Intelligence is superb but not perfect as the Yom Kippur war and October 7 demonstrated but their intelligence in Iran has been exceptional for years. To pass up that opportunity would have been negligence and malfeasance by our government.
The Iranians were given plenty of time to negotiate and step down from the brink but chose otherwise.
You may have your opinions pro or con on this war but I would suspect that if a superpower with the strength of the US with a fleet to the south of you and another to the west in the Mediterranean and has already demonstrated last year that they could sweep aside your air defenses, you might really want to swallow and negotiate seriously. Also your 2 best buddies in Russia and PRC have done nothing for you except words.
I also note people in Iran watched bombs and missiles fall on Tehran on military and leadership sites and were laughing and celebrating.
Woke is on target once again. Iran never posed a threat to anyone. Very lovely peaceniks over there. Flower power, admirers of our hippy-dippy generation. It is all about love, baby. Peace out.
PS the Only reason they were this close to putting the finishing touches on their little old Nukes is because they knew 50 years ago Trump would be anointed by woke as our first King Of The Palace, Alice.
You b learnin. Me 2. Woke is alright.
Turley’s post outlines exactly why the Constitution does not allow the President to start wars. To bad Turley is to MAGA to lead himself to the correct conclusion.
Tell us you know nothing about the Constitution without saying so. Answer the questions.
That boy needs to go to university or somethin to catch up, no what i’m sayin? Adolf O’casio kicks his lil white behind to panama and back, jack!
The REAL Constitution is the one that allowed my president to feloniously hire a Russian spy to write a Russia Dossier, than then send his Attorney Generals and FBI Directors to FISA courts to perjure themselves in order to obtain spy warrants. Too bad you MAGAs think our Presidents can’t do that.
Anon: “To bad Turley is to MAGA to lead himself to the correct conclusion.”
You must be a foreign troll; your English is crappy. You should lose your job.
The one significant flaw in isolation is that we cannot isolate ourselves from the world at this point in time. Back when we were an agrarian culture with self-sufficiency, that may have been mostly possible. Even under Jefferson our private ships were being attacked, confiscated and our citizens imprisoned or sold into slavery by the very same islamic ideology as we see in Iran today. We created the US Marine Corps singularly to deal with the Barbary pirates and were not able to “isolated” from the world 200+ years ago. To dream of us living only within our borders is a pipe dream and should be exposed as such. We cannot be isolationist at this point in world history so why do contrarians continue to beat this dead horse?
we is japan’s nuclear umbrella for pete’s sake, (which gives them a huge tax advantage.) hell, adolf o’casio knode that
The members of Congress and others who are condemning the attack on Iran truly are either paralyzed by fear or so filled with TDS that it has overridden even their most basic survival instinct. Imagine this. There is no debate that Iran resumed trying to build nuclear weapons. There is no debate that Iran and the proxies it funded have loudly and proudly proclaimed their commitment to destroy the United States and Israel. Even faced with these undisputed facts, these people would rather face the sure threat in the near future of a nuclear weapon headed toward them than give any support to anything involving the military that President Trump does. I cannot decide whether they, now adults, used to be the kids in elementary school who gave their lunch money to the class bully to avoid confrontation, or whether they are just nuts. Either way, thank God they are not in power today.
This was not Anonymous, it was honestlawyermostly. I don’t know why it came out as from Anonymous.
hey! knock it off! i almost got 3 likes
To the real Anonymous— I apologize. -Honestlawyermostly
@ honestlawyermostly, The only thing I would add is that it is anything that Trump does they will condemn. Not just the military.
At this juncture the question is not “how” but “why” any members of Congress would want a new War Powers Resolution. It is particularly perplexing when nearly every member of Congress agrees that the death of Ali Hosseini Khamenei has been a necessary and appropriate development. Why be supportive of that and yet not supportive of seeing events follow through to regime change and a most favorable outcome for the Iranian people and the whole of the Middle East as well. The disconnect is mind boggling and shows clearly the ineptitude at play when the motivation is more about disabling Trump by any means and at all costs rather than restoring the Middle East and beyond to some semblance of enduring peace and tranquility.
Leftists are howling now. How soon they forget the bombings by Obama and Biden (and Clinton for that matter.)
Where was the outrage then, lefties? Schiff and Warren and Kelly all posted their tantrums online. The ayatollah had been cheerleading murder and mayhem against the “Great Satan” and the world since 1979. ENOUGH! Check the videos of Iranian celebrations WORLDWIDE and then check your leftist outrage at the door.
I was waiting for “X” and “Anonymous” to post their knee-jerk reactions and right on cue….. So I ask them, Did you really really want Iran to develop nuclear warheads and the ability to deliver them on our cities? Is that right? Did you really really want them to continue funding Hamas and Hezbollah in their continuous attacks on Israel? Is that right? Do you want the state of Israel and all Jews to be eliminated (killed)? Is that right? Did you really really want the women of Iran to continue being brutalized or killed on the whim of their male masters? Is that right? Do you dare answer these specific questions? Or will you try to ignore or obfuscate by your answers? Speak up. Be honest.
Does not matter. Trump is prohibited by the Constitution to start wars.
Tell us you know nothing about the Constitution without saying so. Answer the questions.
The Constitution is clear that only congress can declare war.
It’s not a war.
Well, the first three comments are from morons, who don’t have a clue. SMDH
Turley is using precedent as an excuse but that argument doesn’t fly. Precedent does not override the Article I, Section 8 requirement for Congress to declare war. They argue this is a “war of choice” rather than a defensive necessity there was no imminent danger from Iran. Never.
Trump engages in dangerous circular logic where a president can manufacture a crisis to bypass Congress. Intelligence reports indicated Iran’s uranium was only at 60% enrichment (below the 90% weapons-grade threshold), suggesting there was no immediate threat requiring a unilateral strike without debate. The same BS logic Israel depends on to justify attacking Iran. Being that Trump is too stupid to understand these kinds of things it is entirely plausible that Israel once again managed to manipulate us into fighting this war for them.
The two carrier groups will not be able to sustain weeks of bombings. Not at the tempo they are operating in. Iran has more missiles in the region than we do. And that is not good. Those carriers will have to ration their munitions and tempo to preserve not only their own security but to maintain offensive capability.
Killing the Ayatollah may seem like a huge victory now. But Trump and his military advisors do NOT have any plans for what happens next. None. That seems to be the ongoing theme with Republican presidents. Wage war without an “exit”plan. Which ends up costing us more in resources and money.
“…ongoing theme of Republican Presidents , wage war without an exit plan.” As opposed to others who choose not to engage or engage in a manner which strengthens our adversaries. We are all free to criticize and speculate about our government. Better to do it before the shooting starts.
Hey hey we love LBJ
Blah, blah, blah. TDS, nothing more. Did you complain when Obama killed via drone? The Iranian people would vote Trump king of the world for life if they could.
X says: Turley is using precedent as an excuse but that argument doesn’t fly.
Who would accept the declaration of an avowed communist like X about anything?
Why don’t you have articles by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are
several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an
editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
Please explain how you know this.
There is an old saying, “Inquiring minds want to know”. In the cases of these people they fail on two counts. They are not interested in Inquiring and they have no functioning minds. You will never get a coherent or cogent answer from them.
I posted a simple reply to a post and when I clicked on it, it posted as anonymous . Weird. Likely what happened to you.
“The two carrier groups will not be able to sustain weeks of bombings.”
That’s odd.
When I look at a map of U.S. military assets surrounding Iran, I see a lot more than “two carrier groups.” And that map doesn’t show the B-2 stealth bombers that just struck Iran. Nor does the map show all of the U.S. attack fighter and missile bases throughout the region. Nor does it show the attack submarines (because, you know, they’re under water).
Perhaps you are looking at an old map. Or have poked your own eyes out.
“ongoing theme with Republican presidents. Wage war without an “exit”plan”
So, what was the exit plan in ‘Nam, an interminable war that was nearly the exclusive province of Democratic Presidents. I say “nearly” because Nixon did inherit it and didn’t immediately bring it to a halt, but at the very least he *did* formulate an exit plan, and he *did* ultimately end it.
Sometimes referred to as 💩 or get off of the 🚽
Dithering over how best to initiate ending the Iranian-terror regime’s hold has already been a 45+ year process. Congress can’t/won’t manage Tariffs or Immigration properly, and we think they can manage conducting War? In fact, what Constitutional duties have they managed well?
Throw in total mismanagement of government spending, investigating and eliminating fraud, and fixing our broken and corrupt voting system. Congressional leadership to do the right thing for the US citizens is sorely lacking
This war was started to distract from Trump’s thousands of entries in the Epstein files. Also to distract from the credible allegations of rape by Trump in the Epstein files!
Please, your over-arching TDS is wearisome and unproductive with sentient humans.
Go back to bed.
I’m already distracted by your Furry Tranny costume… Did you model that for Biden after his showers with Ashley came to an end?
OK, post a link to the “credible allegations.”
No. Congress should and must stop the war. They also need to impeach and convict Trump. Starting a war without authorization is a major deal.
What color is the sky in your world?
“Congress should and must stop the war. They also need to impeach and convict Trump.” Also: “We came, we saw, he died… ”
– Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton, celebrating Obama’s war on Libya.
No president needs “authorization” to engage in short-term military operations. Under the WPA, he is required to seek authorization to extend operations beyond 60 days.
That is not what the WPA says.
“The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances”
There is no wiggle room in that.
According to Mark Levin the 1973 WPA is unconstitutional, although it has never been sued out.
I would trust Levin to understand the US constitution far more than ANY democrat.
The only reason the vote will be challenging is because Trump decided to launch the war before they vote was to be held. Massie signaled he was going to hold the vote before hostilities started. Which would have made it harder for Trump to start bombing Iran. There was no nuclear threat or any other national security threat. Trump was goaded by Israel to start before HE would have been boxed in by Congress.
X says: Trump was goaded by Israel to start before HE would have been boxed in by Congress.
Who would accept the declaration of an genocidal Anti-Semitic communist about Israel and Trump?
Why don’t you have articles by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an
editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
Why do you think the US can be goaded by Israel? Generally, the US makes decisions with other nations, but the US dominates. When the US went to war against Iraq, the Israeli experts were against it, but the US did as it pleased. When Israel was at war, regarding the Suez Canal, Israel was stopped by the US. When Israel was on the road to Damascus and Cairo, the US stopped it. Do you see the pattern? The US dominates in these relationships.