Opinion: Why AOC is wrong for calling Trump's strikes unconstitutional
Even as a tenuous cease-fire between Iran and Israel appears to hold, Democrats in the US Congress are falling over themselves to condemn President Donald Trump for the strikes that made this chance at peace possible. Trump's Iran attack is 'unauthorized and unconstitutional,' said the No. 2 Democrat in the House, Katherine Clark.
The framers of the Constitution understood the difference between Congress officially declaring war, on the one hand, and the commander-in-chief of the armed forces taking military action in defense of our nation, in the other hand. The original draft of Article 1 allocated to Congress the power to 'make war.' But James Madison, the father of our Constitution, demanded that it be amended so that the president would have broader authority to take actions in defense of our country.
During the subsequent two and a quarter centuries, various presidents and members of Congress have interpreted this division of authority differently, and many presidents have taken military action without declarations of war or even congressional authorization. In recent years, Democratic Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama authorized significant military actions without any complaints by Democratic members of Congress, including several who have now whined about Trump having acted unconstitutionally.
This is hypocrisy on stilts and reflects the extreme partisan weaponization of the Constitution, even over foreign and military policies. What President Trump did is not different in kind or degree from what previous presidents – both Democrats and Republicans – have done without congressional authorization.
The last time Congress declared war was shortly after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. There were no declarations of war over Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Granada or Panama. In fact, it is unlikely we will ever again see another declaration of war. Perhaps Congress will now do what it has done since the end of World War II: pass resolutions authorizing limited military action by the president. Though, these hybrid resolutions are not authorized by the Constitution either and it is unlikely that they carry any legal weight.
So, by all means, let's continue to debate the wisdom of Trump's decision as a matter of policy, but let's not improperly weaponize a constitutional provision that was never intended to prevent presidents from taking actions deemed necessary to defend our nation, such as the surgical, one-off bombing of three Iranian nuclear facilities. As a matter of policy, a president should not be required to show his hand before ordering a surprise military attack of the kind.
The consequences, both short and long term, of President Trump's bold decision remain to be seen, but he surely had the power to make that decision if he deemed it in the best interests of the country. Congress can now hold hearings, both open and closed, to assess the president's actions, but only hypocritical Democrats, and hard-left radicals afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome will argue that what Trump did was unconstitutional or unlawful. It was not. Pictured: Attorney Alan Dershowitz.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
27 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Zohran Mamdani has the Palestinian protest movement to thank for his win
In a tremendous upset of politics as usual, Zohran Mamdani, a 33-year-old brown, Muslim, Democratic socialist who had little name recognition in February beat the poster boy of the Democratic party establishment, Andrew Cuomo, by a plurality of votes in the first round of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City. What makes this win even more remarkable is that Mamdani has refused to back down from his vocal support for Palestinian liberation, a position that has long been a death knell for candidates within a party whose establishment is unabashedly pro-Israel. Mamdani's victory shows that his support for Palestine is not a liability, nor irrelevant to his mayoral campaign. In fact, Palestine has moved to the heart of domestic politics thanks to an organized, grassroots movement of Palestinians and allies, students and activists, that paved the way for this mayoral win. Over the course of the last two years of genocide, protests and social media activism has shifted the national discourse around Palestine. A Quinnipiac poll has found that sympathy for Israel has reached an all-time low, with Pew showing that over 71% of Democrats aged 18-49 have a negative view. On Wednesday, the day of the Democratic primary (as well as the hottest day New York has seen in over 13 years), I stood on the corner of 146th Street and Amsterdam Avenue, trying to convince New Yorkers to rank Mamdani on their ballot. One of the leaders of our canvass was a student who was doxed for fighting for her university's divestment from Israel alongside Mahmoud Khalil. Later that evening, after Cuomo's concession, Mamdani's campaign manager thanked Jewish Voice for Peace, whose chapters are integral in organizing against Israel's genocide and apartheid, for its early endorsement of his campaign. While Cuomo was rich in money, receiving $26m in Super Pac funds as opposed to Mamdani's $1.8m, Mamdani's wealth was in the people already organized on issues of progressive politics, including Palestine. The Mamdani campaign's 'joyous' ground game, tens of thousands of people who volunteered to knock on over 1.6m doors, is not simply a story of individuals being organically moved to action by progressive politics or a charismatic candidate. It is instead a story of people who have for years been organizing to oppose an electoral system that marginalized them, who saw Mamdani as an alternative to 'elected officials [who] endorse or overlook genocide' whether they organized through ethnic organizations like Desis Rising Up and Moving (Drum) or the Democratic Socialists of American (DSA). This is not a campaign that can be recreated with any fresh face, or just any economically progressive platform. Bernie Sanders is wrong to say that Kamala Harris would 'be president of the United States today' had she simply had a platform geared towards the working class, and focused on knocking on doors. People came out for Mamdani because he rejected a party machinery whose establishment candidate, Cuomo, was literally part of Benjamin Netanyahu's legal team. It mattered that Mamdani started his college's Students for Justice in Palestine chapter. It mattered that Mamdani said he would arrest Netanyahu, that he'd disband the Strategic Response Group of the NYPD, which I'd watched brutalize my City college students as they protested. People came out to campaign for him, rain or shine, because he refused to decry the phrase 'Globalize the Intifada' even as he endured vile smears and a death threat for it. If the mayoral race is a referendum on Israel, there was a record turnout for Mamdani. People who had not voted in prior elections showed up to the polls, with Mamdani winning in deeply Hispanic and Asian areas, and doing extraordinarily well among young people of all races. Polling showed him second among Jewish voters. Mamdani's victory in the Democratic primary, however, is just one big step in what will continue to be a tough mayoral race. Perhaps the largest threat this campaign will face is the pressure placed on it by the pro-Israel machinery of the Democratic party. The senator Kirsten Gillibrand suggested he may be a threat to Jewish New Yorkers, Laura Gillen, a congressperson, called him 'too extreme' and Tom Suozzi, another congressperson, said he had 'serious concerns' about his campaign. Mamdani is reportedly scheduled to sit down for meetings with Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, who have so far declined to endorse him. Mamdani is also being targeted by the right. In a grossly racist action, the Tennessee Republican Andy Ogles called for Mamdani to be denaturalized and deported, posting on X 'Zohran 'little muhammad' Mamdani is an antisemitic, socialist, communist who will destroy the great City of New York.' And even as she called his campaign 'unique' and 'smart', Marjorie Taylor Green retweeted an AI-generated image of the Statue of Liberty covered head-to-toe in a black burqa saying, 'This hits hard.' Mamdani's very identity is a challenge to a two-party system that has normalized anti-Muslim hate, and through its prism anti-Palestinian repression and genocide. Trump began testing his mass deportation policy on the Palestinian students who led the movements that made the Mamdani campaign possible, including by kidnapping and imprisoning Khalil, the negotiator for the Columbia encampment. Trump justified his travel ban, which Mamdani's home country Uganda may be added to in the coming months, as part of fighting antisemitism. What his pathway to victory in the primary shows is that his continued strength, and that of any other candidate hoping to secure a similar victory, will not rely on political endorsements. Instead, it will rely on him staying true to the authenticity that made this campaign resonate with millions of people in New York and around the world.
The Guardian
33 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump dropped an F-bomb this week – and just for a moment, I warmed to him
I did not get out of bed this morning expecting to praise the public use of an expletive, but such is 2025. If any president was going to break this presidential norm, as NPR put it, it was always going to be Donald Trump. 'We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the fuck they're doing,' the president told a group of reporters this week. 'Do you understand that?' he asked, before storming off. It appears to be the first time a president has deliberately used the F-word live on camera to a press scrum or in a public forum, instead of being 'caught' using the term accidentally on a hot mic (even that has only happened a handful of times). Cue plenty of puns from journalists about the 'dropping of the F-bomb'. For the record, Trump actually used the F-word about Iran in 2020, but the slightly delayed radio broadcast bleeped it out. Plus, as this 2016 video compilation shows, it's not unusual for him to swear. But what was different about this time – coming as it did at a moment of heightened global anxiety about military escalation – is that it came across as … authentic. Many people watching will have felt, heard and even shared that frustration about Israel and Iran's alleged breaking of the ceasefire. Trump's swearing made the point more forcefully than any diplomatic 'disappointment' could have done. It wasn't eloquent, but I believed it. We know other presidents – such as Lyndon Johnson, and especially Richard Nixon – swore in private. They wouldn't have dreamed of risking the reputational damage to do so in public, and would have had to apologise if they did. No British prime minister has ever said 'fuck' publicly to my knowledge. Few world leaders ever have. Which is potentially part of the problem. The most common complaint about the political elite is that they're out of touch; that we can't trust a word that comes out of their mouths because it's all untrustworthy scripted spin. Yet at the same time we believe they're swearing like sailors – and saying what they really think – behind closed doors (a perception bolstered by iconic roles such as Peter Capaldi's Malcolm Tucker, the foul-mouthed spin doctor in The Thick of It, or the blue-mouthed Roger Furlong from Veep.) Of course, swearing doesn't equate to honesty. And, in Trump's case, the obscenity only masked his own complicity in creating the situation that frustrated him – from pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal in 2018 to his 'monumental' airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend. But my point is that the public clearly doesn't trust the polished and sanitised scripts that characterise so much political speech. I'm not suggesting world leaders all suddenly disrespect the gravitas of their office. Can you imagine Keir Starmer being encouraged to swear? He'd sound like a headteacher attempting to rap. What I am saying is there's power in judicious swearing. You want to appear more human to voters? Act more like one. YouGov polling reported in April revealed that just 8% of Britons never swear. Perhaps an occasional curse or two would allow politicians to ally themselves with the 92% of us who do. Linguistic norms are always changing. For six years, I wrote a regular column for the Guardian's Mind your language section. During that time, I saw changes that would incense any purist. For instance, the BBC made even less use of those with received pronunciation accents and started broadcasting more voices that really sound like people across the country. Such 'real' accents are supposed to make the institution seem less remote and more trustworthy. The same is true of the institution of politics. Sounding more like real people does nobody any real harm. If the stakes are literally life and death, and people aren't listening, a well-placed, truly meant expletive will wake everyone up. At time of writing, the fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran is holding. Maybe the F-bomb did the job after all. Gary Nunn is a freelance journalist and author
Leader Live
an hour ago
- Leader Live
Huge crowds mourn Iranian military chiefs and scientists killed in strikes
The caskets of Guard's chief General Hossein Salami, the head of the Guard's ballistic missile programme, General Amir Ali Hajizadeh and others were driven on trucks along the capital's Azadi Street as people in the crowds chanted 'Death to America' and 'Death to Israel'. Generals Salami and Hajizadeh were both killed on the first day of the war, June 13, as Israel launched an attack it said was meant to destroy Iran's nuclear programme, specifically targeting military commanders, scientists and nuclear facilities. State media reported more than a million people turned out for the funeral procession, which was impossible to independently confirm, but the dense crowd packed the main Tehran thoroughfare along the entire 4.5km (nearly three-mile) route. There was no immediate sign of Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in the state broadcast of the funeral. The Ayatollah, who has not made a public appearance since before the outbreak of the war, has in past funerals held prayers for fallen commanders over their caskets before the open ceremonies, later aired on state television. Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi was on hand, and state television reported that General Esmail Qaani, who heads the foreign wing of the Revolutionary Guard, the Quds Force, and General Ali Shamkhani were also among the mourners. Gen Shamkhani, an adviser to Ayatollah Khamenei who was wounded in the first round of Israel's attack, was shown in a civilian suit leaning on a cane in an image distributed on state television's Telegram channel. Iran's Revolutionary Guard was created after its 1979 Islamic Revolution. Since it was established, it has evolved from a paramilitary, domestic security force to a transnational force that has come to the aid of Tehran's allies in the Middle East, from Syria and Lebanon to Iraq. It operates in parallel to the country's existing armed forces and controls Iran's arsenal of ballistic missiles, which it has used to attack Israel twice during the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza. Over 12 days before a ceasefire was declared on Tuesday, Israel claimed it killed around 30 Iranian commanders and 11 nuclear scientists, while hitting eight nuclear-related facilities and more than 720 military infrastructure sites. More than 1,000 people were killed, including at least 417 civilians, according to the Washington-based Human Rights Activists group. Iran fired more than 550 ballistic missiles at Israel, most of which were intercepted, but those that got through caused damage in many areas and killed 28 people. Saturday's ceremonies were the first public funerals for top commanders since the ceasefire, and Iranian state television reported that they were for 60 people in total, including four women and four children. Authorities closed government offices to allow public servants to attend the ceremonies. Many in the crowd expressed feelings of anger and defiance. 'This is not a ceasefire, this is just a pause,' said Ahmad Mousapoor, 43, waving an Iranian flag. 'Whatever they do, we will definitely give a crushing response.' State media published images of an open grave plot at Tehran's Behesht-e-Zahra cemetery where army chief of staff, General Mohammad Bagheri, who was killed on the first day of the war, was to be buried beside his brother, a Guards commander killed during the 1980s Iran-Iraq war. Many of the others were to be buried in their home towns. The Iranian judiciary's Mizan news agency confirmed that the top prosecutor at the notorious Evin prison had been killed in an Israeli strike on Monday. It reported that Ali Ghanaatkar, whose prosecution of dissidents led to widespread criticism by human rights groups, would be buried at a shrine in Qom. Iran has always insisted its nuclear programme is only for peaceful purposes. But Israel views it as an existential threat and said its military campaign was necessary to prevent Iran from building an atomic weapon. Ayatollah Khamenei's last public appearance was on June 11, two days before hostilities with Israel broke out, when he met Iranian parliamentarians. On Thursday, however, he released a pre-recorded video, in his first message since the end of the war, filled with warnings and threats directed toward the United States and Israel, the Islamic Republic's longtime adversaries. The 86-year-old downplayed US strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites as having not achieved 'anything significant', and claimed victory over Israel. The head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, Rafael Grossi, has characterised the damage done by American bunker-buster bombs to Iran's Fordo nuclear site, which was built into a mountain, as 'very, very, very considerable'.
