President Donald Trump launched a massive military attack on Iran Saturday, and he described the campaign with a specific, bold term. “The lives of courageous American heroes may be lost, and we may have casualties,” Trump said in his address to the nation, but “that often happens in war.” That last word is critical.
The Constitution limits presidents’ power to make war without the approval of Congress, but for over 200 years Americans have debated how far a president can go. With what we know so far about the attack on Iran, could it be argued that the president has crossed the Constitution’s redline? Of course it could.
Playing devil’s advocate, I’m going to lay out the simplest, strongest argument why Trump’s attack on Iran is unconstitutional. Then I’ll say what I actually think.
Here’s the case against the strikes.
The president is commander in chief of the armed forces, but the Constitution vests in Congress alone the power to “declare war.” Over 150 years ago, in the famous Prize Cases, the Supreme Court stated that this means the president cannot “initiate” a war without congressional authorization.
