• Investing
  • Stock
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Portfolio Performance Today
Economy

Trump ‘doesn’t need permission’ from Congress to strike Iran, expert says

by June 21, 2025
by June 21, 2025

While lawmakers argue over their position in the command chain as President Donald Trump mulls a possible strike on Iran, one expert believes that the president is within his constitutional authority to move ahead with a bunker-busting bomb.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are embroiled in debate over where they are in the pecking order. Some argue they should have the sole authority to authorize a strike, let alone declare war, while others believe that is within Trump’s purview if he wanted to join Israel’s bombing campaign against Iran.

The predominant argument on the Hill is that the entire point of supporting Israel is to prevent the Islamic Republic from creating or acquiring a nuclear weapon.

However, a legal scholar who helped to craft the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which authorized the usage of the U.S. armed forces to engage with the entities that then-President George W. Bush believed were behind the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attack in New York City, argued that there was a difference between Congress’ constitutional authority to declare war and the president’s authority to use force abroad.

‘The position we took then, I think, is the same one that Trump should take now,’ John Yoo told Fox News Digital. ‘As a legal matter, the president doesn’t need the permission of Congress to engage in hostilities abroad. But as a political matter, it’s very important for the president to go to Congress and present the united front to our enemies.’

The Constitution divides war powers between Congress and the White House, giving lawmakers the sole power to declare war, while the president acts as the commander in chief directing the military. Nearly two centuries later, at the height of the Vietnam War, the War Powers Resolution of 1973 was born, which sought to further define those roles.

Yoo agreed that the Constitution was clear that Congress has the sole authority to declare war, which effectively changes the legal status of the country. However, he countered that ‘the framers did not think that language meant that the President and Congress are like the two weapons officers on a nuclear sub and have to turn the keys at the same time to use force.’

‘The founders were very practical men, and they knew that Congress is slow to act, that Congress is a large body that deliberates, but it’s the president who acts swiftly and decisively in defense of the nation,’ he said.

Adding fuel to the debate in Washington are a pair of resolutions in the Senate from Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., and the House, from Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif., that would require debate and a vote before any force is used against Iran. The measures are designed to put a check on Trump’s power and reaffirm Congress’ constitutional authority.

Yoo said that the resolutions appeared to be forms of ‘political opportunism’ and noted that when former President Joe Biden wanted to send aid to Ukraine, when former President Barack Obama engaged abroad or when Trump authorized a drone strike to kill Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, there was no resolution demanding Congress have a say.

‘People on the Hill are conflating what’s constitutionally necessary with what’s politically expedient,’ Yoo said. ‘Two very different things.’

Congress’ real power over war, he said, was the power of the purse, meaning lawmakers’ ability to decide whether to fund the Pentagon and military in their appropriations process. Republicans are currently working to ram Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ through Congress and onto his desk by Independence Day.

Included in the colossal bill is roughly $150 billion in funding for the Defense Department.

‘If Congress really doesn’t want us to, doesn’t want Trump to, get deeper involved in the Israel-Iran war,’ Yoo said. ‘All they got to do is not fund the military.’

‘The ironic thing is, you have people who are voting to give extra tens of billions of dollars to the Defense Department, who are then turning around and complaining that they don’t have the ability to vote on war,’ he said. ‘Every time they vote for funding, they’re voting to make war possible.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

0 comment
0
FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

previous post
Inside the Situation Room, where Trump and his national security team are weighing next steps on Iran
next post
Goldman Sachs names top 3 autonomous vehicle stocks to buy and hold in 2025

Related Posts

Cracker Barrel CEO serves up leftover corporate branding...

August 24, 2025

The history of how Trump and Bolton’s relationship...

August 24, 2025

FBI raid of John Bolton’s home reportedly linked...

August 24, 2025

GOP senators push for Kamala Harris’ testimony as...

August 24, 2025

Justice Jackson accuses Supreme Court of ensuring Trump...

August 23, 2025

James Comer praises Kash Patel for ‘holding deep...

August 23, 2025

John Bolton blasted by Trump ally Roger Stone,...

August 23, 2025

Trump DOJ releases ‘thousands’ of Epstein files to...

August 23, 2025

Trump–Bolton feud back in focus after FBI raid:...

August 23, 2025

Jackson scathing dissent levels partisan charge at colleagues...

August 23, 2025

Stay updated with the latest news, exclusive offers, and special promotions. Sign up now and be the first to know! As a member, you'll receive curated content, insider tips, and invitations to exclusive events. Don't miss out on being part of something special.

By opting in you agree to receive emails from us and our affiliates. Your information is secure and your privacy is protected.

Recent Posts

  • Foxconn recalls more Chinese engineers from India in setback to Apple: report

    August 24, 2025
  • Bank of America identifies 5 stocks with strong growth potential

    August 24, 2025
  • Cracker Barrel stock: why going back to the old logo just isn’t an option

    August 24, 2025
  • Top 3 stocks to buy with strong cash flow and sizable buyback programme

    August 24, 2025
  • Here’s the only FTSE 100 stock in Warren Buffett’s portfolio

    August 24, 2025
  • US government’s investment in Intel may not be enough for turnaround: here’s why

    August 24, 2025

Editors’ Picks

  • 1

    Meta executives eligible for 200% salary bonus under new pay structure

    February 21, 2025
  • 2

    Walmart earnings preview: What to expect before Thursday’s opening bell

    February 20, 2025
  • 3

    New FBI leader Kash Patel tapped to run ATF as acting director

    February 23, 2025
  • 4

    Anthropic’s newly released Claude 3.7 Sonnet can ‘think’ as long as the user wants before giving an answer

    February 25, 2025
  • 5

    Nvidia’s investment in SoundHound wasn’t all that significant after all

    March 1, 2025
  • 6

    Cramer reveals a sub-sector of technology that can withstand Trump tariffs

    March 1, 2025
  • 7

    Elon Musk says federal employees must fill out productivity reports or resign

    February 23, 2025

Categories

  • Economy (2,299)
  • Editor's Pick (217)
  • Investing (185)
  • Stock (1,561)
  • About us
  • Contact us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions

Copyright © 2025 Portfolioperformancetoday.com All Rights Reserved.

Portfolio Performance Today
  • Investing
  • Stock
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Portfolio Performance Today
  • Investing
  • Stock
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
Copyright © 2025 Portfolioperformancetoday.com All Rights Reserved.

Read alsox

Mystery flights from China to Iran raise...

June 20, 2025

Dem senator accuses top Trump official of...

June 27, 2025

A Civil Service for the Twenty-First Century 

April 10, 2025