Can Trump declare war on Iran without US Congress approval? His airstrikes raise fears and questions
The limit of US presidential war powers has become a hot topic of discussion since President Donald Trump ordered airstrikes on Iran's three nuclear facilities: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. U.S. President Donald Trump delivers an address to the nation at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. June 21, 2025, following U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/Pool(REUTERS)
The attacks, which are the most audacious US participation in the Iran-Israel conflict to yet, have drawn political and legal attention in Washington despite not being preceded by a formal declaration of war.
Could Trump's circumvention of Congress lead to his impeachment? What part does the 1973 War Powers Resolution play in limiting the power of the president? What is War Powers Act?
Following the Vietnam War, a protracted battle in which the US played a significant role without issuing a formal declaration of war, the War Powers Resolution (WPR), commonly referred to as the War Powers Act, was established in 1973.
The purpose of the measure was to prohibit the president from initiating war on American soil without the consent of Congress. It attempted to reestablish the power dynamic by:
Mandating that the President provide Congress 48 hours' notice before sending troops
Requiring the soldiers to leave within 60 days unless Congress authorizes their stay
Granting a 30-day grace period for withdrawal that is safe
Despite being designed as a check on presidential power, the WPR has not always been efficiently implemented, and presidents like Trump have frequently circumvented or contested its authority.
Also Read: Tulsi Gabbard fiercely reacts after Donald Trump rejects her Iran assessment as 'wrong' US Constitution's provisions on war declaration
According to Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution, Congress alone has the power to declare war, and Article II, Section 2 designates the President as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.
The purpose of this division was to guarantee that democratic agreement would be reflected in choices to engage major armed wars. But in reality, contemporary presidents have depended more and more on executive power to carry out military actions without issuing official declarations of war. What we know about Trump's Iran strike and other presidential precedents
Although the United States has not declared war since World War II, it has participated in a number of significant conflicts, including Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, without the approval of Congress. In 2017 and 2018, Trump's own government launched strikes in Syria without the consent of Congress.
Trump has launched the airstrikes on Iran as essential to preventing Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons. The assaults, according to US authorities, were "limited, targeted, and in coordination with Israel" and did not represent a larger war effort. Can Congress impeach Trump over Iran war? A look at past
Yes, Congress has the authority to start the impeachment process if it thinks the President has broken the Constitution or legislation like the War Powers Resolution. However, political will would be crucial for such action.
Several presidents, including George W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, and Barack Obama, have carried out military actions without a war authorization from Congress, yet none of them were impeached for it. What comes next?
Trump has so far maintained that the United States does not aim to overthrow the Iranian regime and has touted the attacks as a 'historic moment' to prevent nuclear escalation. Iran has, meanwhile, threatened reprisal and alluded to wider regional repercussions.
Congress may face pressure to take action through legislation, budget limits, or impeachment if the United States gets pushed into a more severe and longer war.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
16 minutes ago
- United News of India
Maha: Fadnavis takes dig at Rahul Gandhi over Make in India
Nagpur, June 22 (UNI) Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis on Sunday took a dig at senior Congress leader and Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, for having no knowledge of the 'Make in India' initiative. Talking to reporters after reviewing various projects here, he claimed that Rahul Gandhi does not even know what is the Make in India. "Rahul Gandhi does not know what is being built in the country, so he does not know Make in India. When the Congress was in power, India's economy was the 11th largest in the world. However. in last 10 years, India has become the fourth largest economy in the world," the CM said and asked Rahul Gandhi to do his homework on this. Fadnavis reviewed various projects in Nagpur such as underground electricity in connection with the construction of STP on the Nag river and vehicle parking outside the city. UNI SP SS
Mint
17 minutes ago
- Mint
Iran's Fordow hit by US bunker buster bombs: What you need to know about the secret nuclear site
The United States has struck Iran's deeply fortified Fordow nuclear site, marking a dramatic escalation in efforts to dismantle Tehran's nuclear capabilities. The overnight airstrike on June 21, part of Operation Midnight Hammer, was carried out using B-2 stealth bombers armed with 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs—making it the first known US attempt to penetrate the underground facility near Qom. The move comes after days of Israeli bombardment that failed to significantly damage Fordow, a site central to Iran's uranium enrichment program and long considered beyond the reach of conventional weapons. Here are key facts about Iran's Fordow nuclear facility: Iran's Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant is one of the most heavily fortified and controversial sites in the country's nuclear infrastructure. Located about 100 kilometers southwest of Tehran near the holy city of Qom, Fordow is buried deep within a mountain — up to 300 feet underground — and is designed to be shielded from conventional airstrikes. Originally constructed in secret around 2006 and officially revealed by Iran in 2009, the site is operated by Iran's Atomic Energy Organization and plays a central role in uranium enrichment. It is one of two facilities — alongside Natanz — where uranium has been enriched to levels close to weapons-grade. Fordow's significance lies in both its output and its protection. The facility has been used to enrich uranium up to 60% purity — just a short step from the 90% enrichment level needed to produce nuclear weapons. In 2023, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) detected particles enriched to 83.7% purity at the site — the highest level ever publicly recorded in Iran. This brought heightened international scrutiny, especially from Israel, which considers any Iranian move toward weapons-grade material an existential threat. Fordow's fortified location makes it nearly invulnerable to Israeli munitions. Only the United States possesses the 30,000-pound GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator — a 'bunker buster' capable of reaching its underground centrifuge halls. In the early hours of Saturday night (June 21), the United States launched a military operation — Operation Midnight Hammer — targeting Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. US President Donald Trump authorised the use of B-2 stealth bombers equipped with GBU-57 bombs to strike Fordow's underground halls. 'We devastated the Iranian nuclear program,' said US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth after the strikes. 'This operation was about neutralizing threats — not regime change.' According to satellite imagery and initial Pentagon assessments, the attacks caused visible damage around the facility, including craters and collapsed tunnel entrances. However, the IAEA has reported no increase in off-site radiation levels, and a full damage assessment is still underway. The IAEA confirmed that no elevated radiation levels have been detected following the strike. But experts caution that radiation and chemical contamination inside the site are likely, and monitoring efforts have become more difficult. Due to the destruction of infrastructure and dispersal of materials, traditional environmental sampling techniques — essential for detecting illicit nuclear activity — may now be unusable at the site. The Fordow strike was viewed as a turning point in the conflict. Israeli airstrikes over the past week had failed to significantly damage Fordow due to its depth and air defenses. By stepping in with bunker busters, the US delivered what many analysts view as a critical blow to Iran's nuclear capabilities. Still, experts warn that much of Iran's enriched uranium stockpile may have already been moved to undisclosed hardened sites, complicating efforts to track and contain its nuclear ambitions.
Time of India
18 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Midnight Hammer': What if US bombing on Iran's nuclear sites was effective - and that's the problem?
By striking three major nuclear facilities in Iran -- Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan -- US President Donald Trump may have delivered a "bold" military blow to Tehran's declared nuclear program. But analysts warn that this apparent tactical victory may come at a strategic cost- making it far more difficult to track what's left of Iran's nuclear activities and where they now lie. The US, in a midnight operation, targeted Iran's three key sites using B-2 bombers loaded with Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs). Satellite images of Fordow show new craters and possible tunnel collapses, but no confirmed damage to the underground enrichment halls. Natanz suffered only partial damage to surface-level infrastructure during earlier Israeli raids, with the extent of US impact still unclear. The most visible destruction appears to be at Isfahan, though reports suggest Iran may have relocated uranium stockpiles ahead of the attacks. Trump hailed the operation as a 'spectacular military success,' saying the sites had been 'totally obliterated.' US defense secretary Pete Hegseth added that the strikes were focused and avoided civilian casualties. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Mannheim: GEERS sucht 700 Testhörer für Hörgeräte ohne Zuzahlung GEERS Undo However, the long-term consequences may be less about what was destroyed and more about what's now untraceable. Follow live updates on Iran-Israel crisis Fallout for nuclear monitoring The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which previously conducted inspections at these sites, has now lost access to key materials and locations. The core mission of the IAEA is to meticulously track even gram-level quantities of uranium globally to prevent its diversion for nuclear weapons. However, according to Tariq Rauf, former head of the agency's nuclear verification policy, the recent airstrikes have significantly complicated efforts to monitor Iran's uranium stockpile. 'It will now be very difficult for the IAEA to establish a material balance for the nearly 9,000 kilograms of enriched uranium, especially the nearly 410 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium,' Bloomberg reported quoting Rauf. Moreover, inspectors, last week, admitted they had lost track of Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium, citing Israeli military operations as a key obstacle to their monitoring efforts. The uranium—previously verified by IAEA inspectors at the Isfahan facility—is sufficient to produce up to 10 nuclear warheads if processed at a covert location. Given its compact volume, small enough to fit into just 16 containers, experts believe the material may have already been relocated to an undisclosed site. What's left and what's next? Iran's nuclear capabilities are widely distributed across hardened facilities and backed by a workforce of thousands. Even if major sites are damaged, the infrastructure, expertise, and undeclared centrifuge stockpiles remain intact. "As for Iran's technical expertise, it cannot be destroyed, knowing that thousands of people have participated in Iran's nuclear programme," AFP quoted nuclear expert Heloise Fayet saying. While Iran is yet to respond militarily, experts suggest it may opt for a measured escalation — symbolic retaliation against Israel or Gulf targets, rather than directly drawing the US into a prolonged conflict.
