The dark side spokespersons have been claiming the military attacks upon Iran are "unconstitutional" because congress has NOT declared war.
Never mind that Presidents have used military power without a declaration of war many times. That does not make their actions constitutional, as multiple wrongs do NOT make a right.
First, we know that the President is sworn to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, which provides the power to respond to attacks by others, nations such as Iran, or non-state entities such as Terrorists.
Second, we know that the President is the Commander in Chief of the Army, Navy and Militia of the several states.
Thus a sound argument may be made for the Presidential Power to use our military power to respond to actual attacks or even potential attacks. The fly in the buttermilk is that the Supreme Court has not ruled sufficiently to provide clear guidance as to the extent or limits of President's power to engage our military.
If a country such as Iran attacks the United States, either its territory or its citizens, either directly or through proxies, does the President have the power to declare a "State of War" exists? No. But does he have the power to respond to the attack, attacks or threat of attack? Certainly Presidents use that power, and as yet, the Supreme Court has NOT ruled against the use of that power.
Never mind that Presidents have used military power without a declaration of war many times. That does not make their actions constitutional, as multiple wrongs do NOT make a right.
First, we know that the President is sworn to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, which provides the power to respond to attacks by others, nations such as Iran, or non-state entities such as Terrorists.
Second, we know that the President is the Commander in Chief of the Army, Navy and Militia of the several states.
Thus a sound argument may be made for the Presidential Power to use our military power to respond to actual attacks or even potential attacks. The fly in the buttermilk is that the Supreme Court has not ruled sufficiently to provide clear guidance as to the extent or limits of President's power to engage our military.
If a country such as Iran attacks the United States, either its territory or its citizens, either directly or through proxies, does the President have the power to declare a "State of War" exists? No. But does he have the power to respond to the attack, attacks or threat of attack? Certainly Presidents use that power, and as yet, the Supreme Court has NOT ruled against the use of that power.
