US Congress divided on legality and wisdom of Iran strikes
Both chambers of Congress are holding emergency hearings as legislators debate whether the president overstepped constitutional authority.
Americas — March 2, 2026
The United States Congress convened emergency hearings Monday on the administration's decision to strike Iran, with lawmakers divided along both partisan and institutional lines about whether the president had the legal authority to conduct the operations.
In the Senate, a bipartisan group of eight senators—four Democrats and four Republicans—introduced a resolution invoking the War Powers Resolution, demanding the president justify the legal basis for the operations within 48 hours or seek congressional authorization.
In the House, Speaker Mike Johnson defended the president's authority but acknowledged that a formal authorization for use of military force would 'strengthen the legal standing' of the campaign and said he was open to scheduling a vote.
National Security Advisor Mike Waltz testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, arguing that existing authorizations—including the 2001 AUMF and the president's inherent Article II powers—provided adequate legal cover.
Former Judge Advocate General officers testifying in a separate hearing warned that the strikes on civilian infrastructure could raise questions under the law of armed conflict, though they acknowledged distinguishing military from civilian targets in Iran's heavily integrated nuclear complex is genuinely difficult.
Polls showed the American public evenly split on the Iran campaign, with 46% supporting and 44% opposing, with significant partisan sorting—Republicans overwhelmingly in favor, Democrats sharply opposed.
