Although the leaders of the Republican Party and many private members supported the decision to bomb the main Iranian uranium enrichment centers, at least two republican congressmen joined the democrats, suggesting that the president's action was incompatible with the constitution because he did not obtain the consent of the congress.
“Although President Trump's decision may be correct, it is difficult for me to imagine constitutional justification for her” – a member of the House of Representatives, a Republican Warren Davidson from Ohio, wrote on Platform X, usually loyal to Trump. – “I am waiting for his presentation.”
Congressmen Thomas Massie from Kentucky, also a Republican, was even more blunt. In response to the Trump's entry about the attack, he stated: “This is not in line with the constitution.”
Massie has already submitted a supreme resolution this week, which aims to block any hostilities against Iran, “unless they are clearly approved by Congress in the form of a declaration of war or a specific authorization to use force.”
During a short speech in the White House on Saturday evening, Trump defended his decision, but did not refer to the legal basis that would give him the right to act without the consent of the Congress.
- Only 17 percent Poles support Israel
Democrats are demanding impeachment
Senator Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont, reacted almost immediately during his speech in Tulsa (Oklahoma), strongly criticizing the president: “This is a gross violation of the constitution,” he said to the crowd, who replied with the chanting: “Enough wars!”
Some democrats called Trump's action the basis for initiating the impeachment procedure.
“The president's decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a serious violation of the Constitution and Congress rights regarding the wag of war,” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from New York wrote at the X Congressmenka. – “This is absolutely and unequivocally a reason for the impeachment. The president impulsively risks the start of the war, which can draw us in generations.”
MP Sean Casten of Illinois emphasized that “it is not a matter of the Iranian nuclear program. No president has the right to attack another state that does not constitute a direct threat to the US, without the consent of the Congress. This is a clearly act for which the president can be put into an accusation.”
Casten called on the chairman of the Chamber of Representatives Mike Johnson to act: “Time to show that he had a spine and defends the war rights of the Congress.”
Johnson himself tried to defend Trump: “The president fully respects the first article of the Constitution and today's necessary, limited and precise attack is part of the tradition of similar actions of presidents from both parties.”
Cracks in the magician movement?
Similar support was expressed by the leader of the majority in the Senate, Republican John Thune from Southern Dakota, which may mean that Trump will avoid more serious repercussions on the part of the Congress Republicans.
The leader of the democratic minority Hakeem Jeffries stated that Trump “did not obtain the consent of the Congress to use military force and risks to draw America into a catastrophic war in the Middle East”, but he did not call the attack unambiguously illegal.
In turn, the deputy head of the Democrats in the House of Representatives, Katherine Clark of Massachusetts, was definitely more direct: “Congress is entitled to declare war. The unilateral decision of Donald Trump about the attack on Iran is unauthorized and unconstitutional. In this way, he exposes our soldiers and diplomats in the region to the escalation of the conflict.”
On Saturday evening, MSNBC was also performed by MP Ro Khanna of California – co -author of the masses resolution – who expressed doubts whether the anti -war voters of Trump would support this move: “This is the first real crack in the magician base (Make America Great Again – editor's note) ” – he noted. “Let us remind you that Trump gained popularity in 2016 just because he criticized Bush for the war in Iraq.”
