Connect with us

World

‘Patently illegal’: Critics dispute legality of Trump’s Iran strikes

Published

on

‘Patently illegal’: Critics dispute legality of Trump’s Iran strikes

Washington, DC – As United States President Donald Trump lauded what he called the “spectacular military success” of the strikes he authorised against Iran, Democrats were quick to accuse him of overstepping his authority.

Numerous critics accused Trump late on Saturday of violating the US Constitution by launching military attacks against Iran’s nuclear sites without the approval of Congress.

“Trump said he would end wars; now he has dragged America into one,” Senator Christopher Van Hollen Junior said in a statement.

“His actions are a clear violation of our Constitution – ignoring the requirement that only the Congress has the authority to declare war.”

In the lead up to the US attacks, legislators from both main parties have pushed measures to compel Trump to approach Congress before launching any strikes.

Advertisement

The US Constitution gives Congress the authority to declare war or authorise the use of force for specific purposes.

Trump’s “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) base has also been vehement in its opposition to the US joining Israel’s war. It has pointed out that Trump won the election on the promise not to commit Washington to yet another war in the Middle East. They want Trump to focus on domestic issues, particularly the economy.

‘Grounds for impeachment’

Lawmakers’ authority over the military was further enshrined in the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which curbed the president’s war-making powers.

Progressive Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Trump violated the constitution and the War Powers Resolution.

“He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment,” she said.

Advertisement

The president is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, so he can order attacks, but his decisions must be within the guidelines of what is authorised by Congress.

However, the president can order the military in the case of a “sudden attack” or to respond to emergencies.

Several Democrats were quick to note that Iran’s nuclear facilities, which have been operating for years, did not pose an imminent threat to the US.

The US intelligence community confirmed in an assessment in March that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon.

Trump has increasingly relied on executive powers in governing domestically, and now he appears to be sidelining Congress in his foreign policy.

Advertisement

But with Republicans in control of the Senate and the House of Representatives, lawmakers have few tools to influence his military decision. Impeachment is almost out of the question.

Lawmakers have introduced bills under the War Powers Resolution to ban attacks on Iran without the approval of Congress, but Trump is likely to veto the proposals if they pass.

Congress could overturn the veto with two-thirds majorities in the House and the Senate, but Trump’s strikes have enough support to make that outcome unlikely.

The US president has not provided a legal justification for the strikes, but he is likely to argue that he was responding to an urgent situation or cite an existing military authorisation.

Advertisement

In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks in 2001, Congress passed a law allowing then-President George W Bush to launch what would become the global “war on terror”.

Millions of people have been killed and societies devastated due to the US wars on Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, among others, waged as part of the so-called “war on terror”. It has also cost trillions of dollars and the lives of thousands of US soldiers.

In 2002, lawmakers approved another authorisation to allow the invasion of Iraq a year later.

These laws, known as the Authorisation for Use of Military Force (AUMF), remain in place, and previous presidents have invoked them to justify attacks that were not specifically approved by Congress.

Brian Finucane, a senior adviser with the US programme of the International Crisis Group and former State Department lawyer, said the attack on Iran is “patently illegal”.

Advertisement

“Even under the prevailing executive branch doctrine, this is likely to constitute ‘war’ requiring congressional authorization,” he wrote in a social media post.

Key progressive Senator Bernie Sanders was speaking at a rally in Oklahoma when Trump announced the attack.

Advertisement

As Sanders told the crowd about the US strikes, attendees started chanting: “No more war!”

“It is so grossly unconstitutional,” he said. “All of you know that the only entity that can take this country to war is the US Congress; the president does not have that right.”

Former Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said lawmakers will be “demanding answers” from the administration.

“Tonight, the President ignored the Constitution by unilaterally engaging our military without Congressional authorization,” she said in a social media post.

Advertisement

World

Video: Fans in Tokyo Visit Twin Pandas Before They Head to China

Published

on

Video: Fans in Tokyo Visit Twin Pandas Before They Head to China

new video loaded: Fans in Tokyo Visit Twin Pandas Before They Head to China

Thousands of people have flocked to Ueno Zoo in Tokyo to see two giant pandas before they leave for China. There were fears in Japan that the twins would not be replaced amid political disputes between the countries.

By Jake Lucas and Axel Boada

December 18, 2025

Continue Reading

World

Zelenskyy calls for US to respond to ‘signals’ Russia is ‘preparing to make next year a year of war’

Published

on

Zelenskyy calls for US to respond to ‘signals’ Russia is ‘preparing to make next year a year of war’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Wednesday called for the U.S. and other allies to respond to bellicose “signals” from Russia.

“Today, we again heard signals from Moscow that they are preparing to make next year a year of war. These signals are not only for us. It is crucial that our partners see them, and not only see them but also respond — especially partners in the United States, who often say that Russia wants to end the war,” Zelenskyy asserted in a post on X.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment. 

“Over the past few weeks, the President’s team has made tremendous progress with respect to ending the war between Russia and Ukraine, and as the President stated, he believes we are closer now than we have ever been,” a White House official noted.

Advertisement

UKRAINE SAYS IT CARRIED OUT FIRST-EVER UNDERWATER DRONE STRIKE ON RUSSIAN SUBMARINE IN NOVOROSSIYSK

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is pictured during a press conference with Friedrich Merz, Federal Chancellor, on Dec. 15, 2025, in Berlin, Germany. (Florian Gaertner/Photothek via Getty Images)

“Yet the signals coming from Russia are the exact opposite, taking the form of official orders to their army. This Russian mindset must be recognized — and acted upon. When Russia is in this mindset, it will also undermine diplomacy — seeking, through diplomatic language and pressure over specific points in documents — to merely mask its desire to destroy Ukraine and Ukrainians, and the desire to legitimize Russia’s theft of our land. And then come other countries in Europe, which someone in Russia might one day label their so‑called ‘historical lands,’” Zelenskyy asserted in the post.

“Real protection is needed against this Russian case history of madness, and we will continue working with all partners to ensure that protection is in place. Security measures are needed, financial measures are needed — including actions on Russian assets — political measures are needed. And the courage of all partners is required: to see the truth, acknowledge the truth, and act accordingly. I want to thank everyone who supports Ukraine,” his post concluded.

Zelenskyy also conveyed the message in a Ukrainian-language video.

Advertisement

US OFFICIALS TOUT PROGRESS IN TALKS TO REACH ‘LASTING AND DURABLE PEACE’ BETWEEN UKRAINE, RUSSIA

In this photo distributed by the state agency Sputnik, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin speaks during an expanded meeting of the Russian Defense Ministry Board at the National Defense Control Center in Moscow on Dec. 17, 2025. (Mikhail TERESHCHENKO / POOL / AFP via Getty Images)

Russian President Vladimir Putin declared during a Defense Ministry board meeting on Wednesday that Russia will accomplish its goals, through either diplomacy or military force.

“The goals of the special military operation will undoubtedly be achieved. We would prefer to accomplish this and address the root causes of the conflict through diplomatic means. However, if the opposing side and its foreign patrons refuse to engage in substantive dialogue, Russia will achieve the liberation of its historical lands by military means. The task of creating and expanding a security buffer zone will also be carried out consistently,” Putin said, according to a Kremlin transcript.

HEADED FOR THE EXITS: WHY 3 DOZEN HOUSE MEMBERS AREN’T RUNNING FOR RE-ELECTION

Advertisement

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., arrives for a House Republican conference meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 6, 2025, in Washington, D.C.  (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., a staunch proponent of U.S. support for Ukraine, asserted in a post on X, “Again… the U.S. should send 200 long-range and extremely accurate cruise missiles to Ukraine. Maybe then, Putin will get serious and seek peace. Putin started this war, and he’ll stop this war once he realizes he cannot win and that the cost of war is too high.”

President Donald Trump’s administration has been attempting to help broker peace between Russia and Ukraine.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Mercosur signature delayed to January after Meloni asks for more time

Published

on

Mercosur signature delayed to January after Meloni asks for more time

Published on
Updated

Following tense negotiations among the 27 member states, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on Thursday pushed the signature of the contentious Mercosur agreement to January to the frustration of backers Germany and Spain.

The trade deal dominated the EU summit, with France and Italy pressing for a delay to secure stronger farmer protections, while von der Leyen had hoped to travel to Latin America for a signing ceremony on 20 December after securing member-state support.

Without approval, the ceremony can no longer go ahead. There is not set date.

Advertisement

“The Commission proposed that it postpones to early January the signature to further discuss with the countries who still need a bit more time,” an EU official told reporters.

After a phone call with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said she supported the deal, but added that Rome still needs stronger assurances for Italian farmers. Lula said in separate comments that Meloni assured him the trade deal would be approved in the next 10 days to a month.

The Mercosur agreement would create a free-trade area between the EU and Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. But European farmers fear it would expose them to unfair competition from Latin American imports on pricing and practices.

Meloni’s decision was pivotal to delay

“The Italian government is ready to sign the agreement as soon as the necessary answers are provided to farmers. This would depend on the decisions of the European Commission and can be defined within a short timeframe,” Meloni said after speaking with Lula, who had threatened to walk away from the deal unless an agreement was found this month. He sounded more conciliatory after speaking to Meloni.

Talks among EU leaders were fraught, as backers of the deal – concluded in 2024 after 25 years of negotiations – argued the Mercosur is an imperative as the bloc needs new markets at a time in which the US, its biggest trading partner, pursues an aggressive tariff policy. Duties on European exports to the US have tripled under Donald Trump.

Advertisement

“This is one of the most difficult EU summits since the last negotiation of the long-term budget two years ago,” an EU diplomat said.

France began pushing last Sunday for a delay in the vote amid farmers’ anger.

Paris has long opposed the deal, demanding robust safeguards for farmers and reciprocity on environmental and health production standards with Mercosur countries.

The agreement requires a qualified majority for approval. France, Poland and Hungary oppose the signature, while Austria and Belgium planned to abstain if a vote were held this week. Ireland has also raised concerns over farmer protections.

Italy’s stance was pivotal.

Advertisement

However, supporters of the agreement now fear prolonged hesitation could prompt Mercosur countries to walk away after decades of negotiations for good.

After speaking with Meloni, Lula said he would pass Italy’s request on to Mercosur so that it can “decide what to do.”

An EU official said contacts with Mercosur were “ongoing,” adding: “We need to make sure that everything is accepted by them.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending