Iran strike was launched without approval from Congress : NPR
Video of President Trump’s announcement of U.S. strikes against Iran is shown in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House on February 28, 2026.
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
Efforts to limit the president’s ability to take sustained military action in Iran without congressional approval are becoming increasingly urgent after the United States and Israel launched strikes aimed at toppling the regime.
The strikes, which began Saturday morning, were launched without authorization from Congress. Article 1 of the Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to declare war. The top Democrats and Republicans in Congress who make up a group known as the Gang of Eight — the party leaders of both chambers, as well as the leaders of the intelligence committees — were briefed by the White House shortly before the attack.
Initial reaction to the nighttime attack did not divide sharply along partisan lines, although most of the praise came from Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.
“Today, Iran faces serious consequences for its evil actions,” Johnson wrote in a statement. “President Trump and the Administration have made every effort to seek peaceful and diplomatic solutions in response to the Iranian regime’s continued nuclear ambitions and development, terrorism, and the murder of Americans – and even its own people. »
Thune praised Trump for launching the strikes, saying Iran’s nuclear ambitions, missile program and support for terrorist groups posed “a clear and unacceptable threat” to U.S. interests in the region.
“I am confident that she will successfully achieve the very clearly stated objectives of this operation,” wrote Rep. Rick Crawford, R-Ark., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. “I would strongly advise the Iranian regime to heed President Trump’s warning.”
A plume of smoke rises following a reported explosion in Tehran on Saturday after the launch of US and Israeli strikes against Iran.
Atta Kenaré/AFP via Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Atta Kenaré/AFP via Getty Images
Most Democrats and a handful of Republicans sharply criticized the operation.
“The administration has failed to provide Congress and the American people with critical details about the scale and immediacy of the threat,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote in a statement. “The administration must brief Congress, including an immediate briefing of all senators and public testimony, to answer these vital questions.”
“In the president’s own words, ‘America’s heroes may be lost,'” Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, wrote in a statement. “This alone should have required the highest level of oversight, deliberation, and accountability, and yet the President moved forward without seeking authorization from Congress.”
A spokesman for Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he was briefed last night before the strikes by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
A U.S. official said Rubio outlined the situation Tuesday during an hour-long briefing with the Gang of Eight.
Rubio called these eight members before the strikes and contacted seven of them. Armed forces committees were informed early this morning of the start of the strikes, according to the official.
“Everything I have heard from the administration before and after these strikes against Iran confirms that this is a war of choice without a strategic purpose,” wrote Representative Jim Himes, Democrat of Connecticut, ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, in a statement.
Pressure for a vote on war powers
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., a frequent critic of Trump and deeply opposed to this type of intervention, noted that the strikes were “acts of war not authorized by Congress.”
As Trump and top officials signaled the possibility of military action against Iran, Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, were already preparing for a House vote this week on a resolution to restrict the president’s ability to intervene without congressional approval.
A similar bipartisan measure is also expected to come up for a vote in the Senate, sponsored by Sen. Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, and Sen. Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky.
Rep. Thomas Massie (left) and Rep. Ro Khanna, seen outside the Justice Department on Feb. 9, led a campaign in the House for a vote on war powers.
Alex Wong/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Alex Wong/Getty Images
Kaine called on Congress to immediately return to vote on the resolutions, which are privileged, meaning they have a guaranteed vote.
“The lives of our troops are in danger,” Kaine told NPR. Weekend Edition SATURDAY. “We should return to Washington immediately to vote on this.”
More recently, the administration has struck suspected drug boats in the Caribbean and launched an operation in Venezuela in January to extradite its then-President Nicolas Maduro.
A War Powers resolution to withdraw intervention in Venezuela earlier this year initially gained enough Republican support to advance in the Senate, but enough ultimately changed their minds and the measure failed.
Supporters of these war powers resolutions say that even if they fail, it is important for accountability that members vote on the record. Votes can also influence the president and force the public to pay attention to the separation of powers debate.
Planned votes on limiting military intervention in Iran were already narrowly decided, but the strikes could change the calculus of some lawmakers now that action is no longer hypothetical.
And unlike in the case of Venezuela, where the administration assured lawmakers that action would be limited, Trump warns that “the lives of courageous American heroes may be lost, and we may have casualties.” This often happens in times of war.”
The success of a war powers resolution is far from guaranteed.
In addition to strong Republican opposition to the idea of reducing Trump’s authority, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., is among the lawmakers backing the attack, writing in a statement that Trump “has been willing to do what is right and necessary to produce real peace in the region.”
Rep. Josh Gottheimer, D-N.J., said a resolution would: “Restrict the flexibility needed to respond to real and evolving threats and risks, signaling weakness at a dangerous time.”
And in recent months, Congress has demonstrated its desire to reassert some authority in this space, but the legislative branch ends up bowing to the wishes of the executive.
