President Donald Trump's military operation against Iran without congressional approval is drawing criticism for potential constitutional violations. Meanwhile, the United Nations Security Council has failed to produce solutions for de-escalation.
CNN reported on the 28th (local time), citing U.S. legal experts. "The White House has not presented legal justification to the public, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio has not provided sufficient explanation to lawmakers," CNN reported. "Experts particularly believe the constitutional concerns will grow as the conflict extends."
The primary reason for constitutional objections is that the U.S. Constitution explicitly states only Congress can declare or authorize war. However, President Trump did not obtain congressional approval for last year's bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities or the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro earlier this year.
Article II of the Constitution does grant the commander-in-chief authority to deploy military force for engagements necessary to advance national interests abroad. Previous presidents including George H.W. Bush and Barack Obama have used this provision to justify military interventions in foreign countries.
Experts say the legality of this attack will depend on its scale, scope, and duration. Operations that are prolonged and comprehensive enough to constitute war could clearly be unconstitutional. In his video announcement of the airstrikes, Trump stated, "This operation is massive and ongoing," adding, "Brave American heroes may lose their lives. That happens often in war, but we are doing this for the future."
Ilya Somin, law professor at George Mason University, said, "This is clearly a war. President Trump himself is calling it a war." He added, "I won't shed tears if the Iranian regime falls, but this war is unconstitutional."
Steve Vladeck, professor at Georgetown University Law Center, said, "The Justice Department is offering increasingly dubious rationales to defend the airstrikes, but virtually all arguments depend on the strikes being limited and unlikely to lead to broader conflict." He continued, "Even if that were a legal argument rather than a policy argument, it's hard to take it seriously in this case."
Despite the U.S. attack on Iran and news of Khamenei's death, the international community appears paralyzed. The UN Security Council's emergency meeting on the 1st produced only criticism of the Trump administration's unilateral use of military force, with no solutions for de-escalation.
Amir Saeid Iravani, Iran's UN Ambassador, said at the meeting, "Innocent civilian casualties continue to mount. This is not merely an act of aggression but a war crime and a crime against humanity."
Mike Waltz, U.S. Ambassador to the UN, dismissed claims that the operation violates international law as "ridiculous and frankly absurd."
Bombing continued even as the Security Council meeting spun its wheels. The Israeli military announced on the morning of the 1st that it had launched airstrikes against Iran for the second consecutive day. Trump also signaled additional attacks are planned when announcing Khamenei's death.
Amid the full-scale U.S.-Israeli offensive and Iranian counterattacks, casualties in Iran and neighboring countries are mounting. Iran's Red Crescent reported damage in 24 of Iran's 31 provinces, with at least 201 dead and 747 injured. In Iran's retaliatory strikes, Dubai's Burj Al Arab hotel, a UAE landmark, caught fire after drone debris fell on it. With missiles flying from multiple directions, most Middle Eastern countries including Iran and Israel have closed major airports and suspended civilian flights.