President Donald Trump’s decision to strike Iran without congressional approval draws criticism, continuing a pattern of presidents expanding military authority since the Truman administration.
President Donald Trump’s decision to order military strikes on Iran without first seeking congressional approval was met with immediate, yet familiar, criticism from lawmakers across the political spectrum.
Presidents have for decades taken actions similar to Trump’s and attracted backlash for skirting Congress’s authority. The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war but presidents the power to control the military and foreign policy.
Gene Healy, a senior vice president with the libertarian Cato Institute, told Fox News Digital that in terms of «crossing a constitutional Rubicon, this is territory that presidents have been dancing over since at least Harry Truman.»
«In each case, it’s at odds with the original design of constitutional war powers, which is that one single person should not have the power to embroil the United States in foreign wars», Healy said.
His think tank also rebuked former President Barack Obama in 2011 after Obama unilaterally authorized airstrikes in Libya as part of a NATO-led effort to enforce a no-fly zone in the country and protect civilians there.
«The president is derelict in his duty to obey the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution. And Congress is derelict in its duty to assert its constitutional authority», another member of the thinktank wrote at the time.
Congress passed the War Powers Act in 1973 to install guardrails for presidents who seek to authorize military action, but critics have said the resolution has lacked potency and that the legislative branch needs to reassert its authority by passing a tougher policy or making good on government funding threats.
