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.”
Trump knows that the worst case scenario for this entire conflict would NOT take two months to resolve.
In, at most, two weeks, the Iranian military “resistance” (being kind there) will be mostly annihilated.
Democrats (and their RINO buddies) are just grandstanding for the cameras here, just as they did last June when they all condemned the very successful annihilation of Iran’s nuclear development.
Trump and Hegseth don’t believe in the prior 60 years examples set by American POTUSs of “just enough war”.
They believe in devastating, catastrophic force, with minimal risk to American and civilian lives.
Those who can’t see that by now are just partisan Trump-deranged hacks who are inconsequential except in their own minds.
Presidential responsibilities:
The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30-day withdrawal period, without congressional authorization for use of military force (AUMF) or a declaration of war by the United States.
Congressional responsibilities:
Congress can declare war or authorize force in a matter of hours or days during a crisis, though there is no set minimum time limit. Under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, the President must notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops, and Congress has 60–90 days to authorize the action before forces must be withdrawn.
The question is: How long will it take Congress to get off its ass and pass a resolution.
Odd…
You didn’t care when Clinton or Obama was bombing away
It’s running to me that any congress person would be ok with ending this. The Iranian women and girls live in tyranny. Nothing else will do. If its ok for a democrat to stand back and think 50,000 dead protesters is fine then they are gone to me forever. They kind of already were but there were a few left I might listen to briefly. Terrible vile policy. To me well it means a holocaust is ok in their small minds.
The real kicker is when Judge Boasberg rules Trump has no power etc. And we’ll see a Judge confiscate article 2 for himself. 😂
Carpe diem…
Using a business comparison, even amongst corporate CEOs, Trump is a rare minority – his experience gives him some advantages but also could eventually be his downfall.
Unlike the vast majority of CEOs, to the best of my knowledge Trump has always been both CEO and “majority” shareholder, unlike most other CEOs. Basically a big business being run like a small business.
Trump’s decades of business experience really don’t apply well to governing.
In government, Congress is akin to the Board of Directors and citizens are akin to shareholders. The president (akin to a CEO owning minority shares – not a dictatorship) is essentially “subordinate” in most ways to Congress, voters and the Constitution.
Trump may have some really good ideas every once in a while. Since Republicans control Congress, this Congress would likely rubber-stamp any good ideas Trump proposed.
What may ultimately destroy Trump likely will be acting like a wanna-be dictator (or CEO owning a majority of shares, perceiving himself as the owner of all things) – not respecting the limits of his constitutional power. Not sure Trump knows how to be an American president even if he wanted to?
The Dems would vote in favor of China invading the USA if it means that it will make Trump look bad. Those fools are psycho. . .
As the constitutional American commander-in-chief, the president acted prudently, temporarily, peremptorily, and preemptively to faithfully execute the laws and protect all states from invasion and clearly threatened “death to America.”
The president did not declare war, which is a power of Congress.
_______________________________________________________________________
Article 2, Section 1
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 2, Section 2
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States,….
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Article 2, Section 3
…he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,….
________________________________________________________________
Article IV, Section 4
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature can-not be convened) against domestic Violence.
I spent 12 years in the military, four of them in combat. I never considered Article II as giving the president any kind of authority to wage war without some kind of Congressional approval. It merely means that the president is the commander of the armed forces, but it does not give him the power to commit them on his own whim. It started with Harry Truman in Korea then was followed by JFK in Vietnam. LBJ escalated the war but he got Congressional approval to do it. As for Trump thinking he can accomplish his goals without committing ground troops, how does he propose to do it? Sure, he can throw missiles and bombs and around and might even manage to hamper the Iranian navy but they’ve got missiles and bombs too and they have missiles that can sink ships. Hopefully, it will end quickly and Trump will declare victory but it could turn into a protracted war. Regardless, I fear Trump has destroyed conservative hopes of maintaining control of the government. I don’t know about other states but here in Texas Democrats have been turning out in larger numbers to vote in the primaries while Republicans have been blowing the horn about how close they are to Trump. I can just see a Senator Crockett or Talarico. I did not vote for Trump to start another war.
lol
nice
try
u fool
Please provide your MOS, awards, campaigns, and theater.
Four years in combat is one long firefight.
Sign above the bar in the enlisted man’s club, Cu Chi, Vietnam, 1970:
“War is Hell. Combat is a Mother ——!”
Clearly, you were in not hell, but the mother of all mother——s!
Some Republicans like me are interfering in the Democrat Primary by voting for Jasmine. Then I will vote for Paxton in the runoff if there is one.
Thanks but please vote for Wesley Hunt. He runs rings around Paxton and Cornyn combined. I lived inFort Worth for 20 years and voted for both of them several times but it’s past time for them to retire. Wes will be a great senator for the Great State of Texas.
Operation AIPAC Furry : the bombings will continue until we have lasting peace.
I voted for Trump 3 times because each time he was clearly the best choice for my country. He still is but I wish he would shake that monkey off his back.
Oldfish says, “the bombings will continue until we have lasting peace.
In other words, “the beatings will continue until morale improves around here”.
Typical stupid comment from a MAGA moron who has absolutely no understanding of what is going on here.
The only way to a lasting peace is by having a plan in place to ensure that responsible leaders come to power, and to provide guidance to the Iranian people on how to achieve a democratic government that is an ally of the US.
On Meet the Press today, Lindsey Graham was specifically asked if Trump has a plan to achieve this.
His answer, ” No, it’s not his job”.
It is very much his job if he wants regime change in Iran. It is completely pointless trying to bomb the current regime out of existence and then leaving a void, a power vacuum, with no plan to fill it.
This entire escapade is doomed to failure.
amen
put adold o’casio in charge
she may know where illinois is
Well if Lindsey said it on Meet the Press, it must be true.
Who “declares war” in this century? That’s obsolete, gentlemanly language. Congress cannot do anything but screw things up and leak to enemies who a few crazy Congresspeople sympathize with.
Let’s trust our President taking advice from our military and intel planners to know what they are doing.
This is high-stakes geopolitical security operations. A decision not participate (the refuge if the irresponsible, timid coward) is not an option. Either get in the game to win, or expect to be walked all over in the future.
Dems cannot expect to have exclusive control over foreign policy, and right now, until they show more national pride and moral clarity, they don’t deserve a seat at the table.
Practically and legally, Congress can and do little to alter the course of events here. Trump took a very big gamble here, and it will play itself out without regard to debates or votes in Congress.
The biggest risk is that Iran’s capacity to fire missiles and drones outlasts the munitions we have for defense. Trump is betting that he can completely degrade Iran’s capabilities, or compel them to stop, before we and Israel cease to be able to defend our assets in the area.
If we avoid that outcome, the consequences are all favourable for the US and Israel, though not in all cases for Iran.
1. A moderate secular regime could emerge quickly — very low probability;
2. A more moderate theocratic regime could survive and sue for peace, agreeing to enough of what Trump has been asking for — medium probability; or
3. Iran descends into anarchy or fragments along ethnic or other lines, potentially destabilising neighbours but ceasing to be a force in the region and no longer being allied effectively with China or Russia — medium probability.
This is a joint US-Israeli op. There’s 99% support in Israel for finishing off the regime. So, it’s not totally up to Congress.
President Trump hosted yet another glitzy fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago Saturday night as the Middle East was lit up by Iranian missiles targeting U.S. assets and our allies in the region, and while US servicemen were killed.
Video posted on Instagram appeared to show Trump greeting wealthy visitors at his West Palm Beach club on the night that Tehran vowed to unleash “devastating blows” in retaliation for airstrikes which killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.
Trump admitted in a 2 a.m. Truth Social post in the early hours of Saturday morning that he expected U.S. citizens to die in the war he had just started, but that put no dent in the party schedule at Trump’s private beach resort.
Those fears were later confirmed by military officials, who said Sunday that three U.S. service members were killed and five others seriously wounded in Operation Epic Fury.
Karoline Leavitt told White House reporters on Saturday afternoon that the president would take time out from launching wave after wave of missile strikes against Iran to mingle with millionaires at a Republican fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago.
Florida Vape magnate Shlomi Evgi posted photos on Instagram on Saturday night that showed him posing with Trump’s top diplomatic brains, Marco Rubio and Steve Witkoff. He also posted video footage of Trump in a gilded room, wearing a golden tie, shaking hands with high-rolling guests who had paid top dollar to attend the fundraise.
So Trump starts a war in the Middle East, then attends a party at Mar-a-Largo while US servicemen are being killed.
Any responsible Commander-in-Chief would be in the White House situation room with military leaders closely monitoring events in order to respond quickly to any changing events.
But of course Trump is in way anything remotely resembling a responsible Commander-in-Chief.
This is all just a game done to distract from his collapsing poll numbers and the Epstein files.
He does not care that US servicemen are being killed, as long as he can distract from his collapsing polling and his Epstein problems.
Speaking of Money; Where Do you get yours?
And your point is what exactly?
One problem when Trump does things like this is that the Democrats hate him even more, driving them seriously to feel impotent. This concatenates with the apparent fact that many the street protestors are paid to protest. Compound with this is that the Democrats have taken the “20 side” on several 80-20 issues to hang their hats on, and seemingly cannot correct their course. What’s their latest? To shut down the government for no point whatsoever, except possibly cheap revenge. And to top it off, their biggest backers are washed up or aging actors, some students, and college faculty.
Kaine didn’t win the VP election – the one Mrs. Bill also lost. So … he whines about everything and anything to get some attention. He continues to be remembered only for being someone who did NOT become the VP in 2017.
“Today’s military strikes on Iran — carried out by the United States and Israel — mark a catastrophic escalation in an illegal war of aggression.” It sounds like something Ali Hosseini Khamenei himself would have said had he the opportunity. Instead, the words are comfortably those of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani who himself is just another radical Shia Muslim of the Twelver Branch. And some may have thought that Mamdani’s worst belief and practice is that of a hardened and unconditional socialist.
Did you vote for kamal Harris?