On June 21, President Donald Trump announced that U.S. warplanes had conducted strikes against three Iranian nuclear facilities. This action aligns the U.S. with Israel’s ongoing efforts to neutralize what both nations deem a significant threat.
In the aftermath of this announcement, concerns have emerged regarding presidential authority and the role of Congress in authorizing military action abroad. In response, lawmakers have introduced resolutions in both congressional chambers that would compel President Trump to seek Congressional approval before engaging U.S. service members in any offensive operations against Iran.
Legal experts have been examining the complexities surrounding the president’s authority to launch such strikes. In testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2017, an analyst highlighted that the president has broad powers under Article II of the U.S. Constitution to order military force. This includes the ability to respond to actual or anticipated attacks against the U.S., as well as to protect national interests.
Presidents from both political parties have exercised this power, deploying U.S. forces without seeking Congressional approval on numerous occasions over the years.
While Article II grants significant powers to the president, Article I vests Congress with the authority to “declare War.” However, this power has historically not been interpreted as requiring Congressional authorization for every military action that a president might initiate.
The Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel has acknowledged that the “declare War” clause could potentially restrict the president’s Article II powers when it comes to military commitments that rise to the level of “war.” The Office has noted that determining whether an engagement constitutes
image source from：pbs
