Washington (TDI): A group of US lawmakers from both major parties are calling for tighter limits on President Donald Trump’s authority to carry out military operations in Iran, saying Congress must reassert its constitutional power over decisions of war.
The criticism came in the wake of Trump’s decision to launch airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites over the weekend, a move that has intensified fears of wider conflict in the Middle East.
Senator Tim Kaine, a Democrat from Virginia, said he intends to force a vote in the Senate this week on a resolution that would require Trump to halt military hostilities against Iran unless formally authorized by Congress.
“This is not a defensive action. It’s a war of choice and a dangerous one,” Kaine told Face the Nation on CBS. “There is no compelling national security justification for this attack, and there was no consultation with Congress.”
Read More: Trump Hints at Regime Change in Iran
In the House of Representatives, Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna and Republican Thomas Massie said they would push for a vote on similar legislation. “We’re asking Congress to do its job,” Massie said. “We were promised an end to endless wars. Instead, we’re seeing another one unfold.”
House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune were reportedly informed ahead of the strikes, but many rank-and-file lawmakers were left in the dark. A full congressional briefing is expected Tuesday, according to Reuters.
Despite growing concerns, passage of any resolution curbing Trump’s powers remains unlikely, given strong support for the strikes from Republican leadership.
Read More: US Urges China to Stop Iran from Blocking Strait of Hormuz
Trump’s decision to strike Iran has also sparked debate within his own political base. While some conservative voices have praised the president’s assertiveness, others see the move as a betrayal of the promises made during his previous campaigns, particularly to avoid entanglements in long foreign conflicts.
“I represent the coalition that helped elect Trump and what we wanted was a focus on America, not another foreign war,” said Massie. “There was no imminent threat. We weren’t briefed. This shouldn’t be how decisions of war are made.”
The fresh wave of criticism underscores a growing divide in Washington over how far executive war powers should stretch, especially when diplomacy, not missiles, might still be on the table.
Farkhund Yousafzai is an Associate Editor at The Diplomatic Insight.
