Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Tuesday asserted that the War Powers Act is unconstitutional, pushing back forcefully against the lawmakers in both parties who are invoking the law in an effort to block President Trump from further military action in Iran.
Johnson has already rejected calls to stage a vote on a bipartisan war powers resolution in the wake of Trump’s decision to strike three Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend, arguing that Congress’s input is unnecessary. On Tuesday, he took that opposition a long step forward, saying the War Powers Act — a 1973 law designed to limit a president’s authority to wage unilateral war — defies the Founder’s designs for the commander in chief.
“Many respected constitutional experts argue that the War Powers Act is itself unconstitutional. I’m persuaded by that argument,” Johnson told reporters in the Capitol. “They think it’s a violation of the Article II powers of the commander in chief. I think that’s right.”
The comments are the strongest indication to date that Johnson, a close Trump ally, has no intention of trying to check the president’s use of military forces, even amid the growing calls from bipartisan lawmakers to block further action in Iran without explicit congressional approval.
Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) have led the charge for those limits, championing a resolution designed to force Trump to “terminate the use” of Pentagon forces against Tehran unless Congress sanctions the operations. Bucking Johnson, Massie has threatened to force a vote on the resolution if the threat of more strikes continues.
On Monday, three Democrats piled on with a similar resolution. Sponsored by Reps. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the measure aims to force the removal of all U.S. forces in Iran without Congress OK’ing the operations.
“President Trump must not be allowed to start a war with Iran, or any country, without Congressional approval,” the lawmakers said in a joint statement.
Johnson has defended the inaction on Capitol Hill by pointing to a number of cases in the past when Democratic presidents have launched strikes on overseas adversaries without Congress’s formal endorsement. The list includes U.S. strikes in Syria and Yemen, under former President Biden; in Syria and Libya, under former President Obama; and in Bosnia, under former President Clinton.
“Every one of those actions were taken unilaterally and without prior authorization from Congress,” Johnson said. “The bottom line is the commander in chief is the president, the military reports to the president, and the person empowered to act on the nation’s behalf is the president.”
“The last few days have unfolded exactly as the law outlines, and as history has demonstrated, and as the framers of the Constitution intended.”
Some Democrats are readily conceding that Democratic presidents have launched military operations without Congressional approval. But that, these voices say, was a mistake — one that shouldn’t be repeated by Trump in Iran.
“I publicly stated at the time that Obama needed congressional authorization to strike Syria. I believe Trump needs congressional authorization to strike Iran,” Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), the vice chair of the House Democratic Caucus, told reporters in the Capitol. “My view of the Constitution does not change based on what party the president happens to belong to.”
Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) acknowledged that presidents have unilateral powers to take military action, but only when the threat to Americans is imminent.
“Many of our members worship at the shrine of the War Powers Act. However, if our country is attacked, all and any powers go to the president to act,” she said. “That didn’t exist here, so the president should have come to Congress.”
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
