Q&A – How Many Presidents Have Used Military Force Without a Declaration of War? – Driven By Braman Motorcars
Each day I feature a listener question sent by one of these methods.
Email: brianmudd@iheartmedia.com
Social: @brianmuddradio
iHeartRadio: Use the Talkback feature – the microphone button on our station page in the iHeart app.
Today’s Entry: @brianmuddradio Do you agree with those who say Trump’s strikes were unconstitutional? If not, why?
Bottom Line: One of the common refrains uttered by those opposed President Trump’s decision to use B-2 stealth bombers to drop MOPs, or Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs, the world’s most destructive non-nuclear weapons – and as I outlined last week, the only bombs with the potential to reach Iran’s nuclear facilities – is that the strikes were unconstitutional. From AOC and Bernie, to the Libertarian Party, condemnation came down from those who opposed the president’s military intervention in Iran. And whether you agree with the president’s decision to do what he did or not, as always there are two sides to stories and one side to the facts. Let’s get to the facts as it pertains to the constitutionality of President Trump’s ordered Iranian strikes.
Let's start with a trivia question. How many U.S. Presidents have taken military action against a foreign adversary without a formal declaration of war by congress? Have a number in mind... The answer is 43. 43 of the 45 U.S. presidents have ordered military force without a formal congressional declaration of war. The two exceptions are:
- William Henry Harrison (1841): Died 32 days into his term, no military actions.
- Zachary Taylor (1849–1850): No significant military engagements during his brief presidency.
That’s it. Literally every US president, starting with George Washington (who did it twice), who has served at least a full four-year term in office, has done the equivalent (or more) to what President Trump did in Iran over the weekend (including President Trump himself during his first term – the attacks on ISIS, against the Assad regime in Syria, the attack of Iranian terror mastermind Soleimani, and strikes against Al Qaeda in Yemen).
In fact, here’s a fun fact for Civil War history buffs. Did you know that President Lincoln never sought a formal declaration of war prior to the Union’s entrance into the Civil War – nor did Congress ever grant one? President Biden conducted three airstrikes against foreign adversaries during his four years – without claims those acts were unconstitutional and President Obama did it five times. All told, 108 authorizations of military force against foreign adversaries have been carried out through the use of executive authority preceding Saturday’s strike on Iran. And in fact, Democrats have been the most prolific users of executive authority to carry out military attacks. Here are the top five users of military strikes through executive authority only:
- Woodrow Wilson & Bill Clinton: 6
- Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama: 5
The expressed constitutional authority for these actions is in Article 2 Section 2 and has been further defined by Congress overtime through what’s known as an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF). AUMFs are congressional resolutions that grant the president authority to deploy military forces for specific purposes without a formal declaration of war. The most recent incarnation of the AUMF law was passed in 2001, one week after 9/11. Notably, the bill passed Congress unanimously. In the law, the text reads:
IN GENERAL.—That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
It is quite clear that Iran, the world’s leading terror sponsor, would fall under the ...preventing future actors of international terrorism banner. Simply put, given the prolific use of AUMF’s by all previous full-term presidents and the most recent governing law that explicitly allows for proactive executive acts to protect against future terror attacks, President Trump had every constitutional right to do what he did.