The Trump administration is facing intense scrutiny from lawmakers over the legality of its recent “Operation Midnight Hammer,” a precision strike on Iranian nuclear sites conducted without congressional approval. The massive Saturday operation, involving 125 aircraft and 75 precision weapons hitting Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan, has been defended by officials as a necessary, targeted action to prevent nuclear weaponization. Secretary of State Marco Rubio clarified on “Face The Nation” that it was “not an attack on Iran” but aimed to “degrade and/or destroy three nuclear sites related to their nuclear weaponization ambitions.”
Vice President Vance echoed this on “Meet The Press,” stating the U.S. was “at war with Iran’s nuclear program,” emphasizing the President’s authority to prevent WMD proliferation and assuring a swift, decisive outcome. However, these justifications have not appeased a segment of Congress.
Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, a co-sponsor of a bipartisan War Powers Resolution, publicly challenged the administration’s claims, asserting on “Face The Nation” that no “imminent threat” warranted bypassing Congress. He criticized lawmakers for not returning to debate the resolution before the strike. Massie’s stance, however, appears to be a minority view within his own party.
House Speaker Mike Johnson quickly came to the President’s defense, arguing on X that “leaders in Congress were aware of the urgency” and the “imminent danger outweighed the time it would take for Congress to act.” He also suggested Trump respects Congress’s constitutional powers. Yet, top Democrats, reportedly not informed until after the fact, decried the move as illegal. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) warned of heightened risks for American troops and argued that the attack clearly constituted “hostilities” requiring congressional authorization. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) concurred, stating the “imminent threat” condition was not met, placing U.S. forces in greater peril.