186

President Trump on Friday suggested that the War Powers Act, which requires presidents to seek congressional authorizations for foreign conflicts, is unconstitutional, as the Iran war hit 60 days, a key milestone under the Vietnam War-era law. The U.S. and Israel launched attacks against Iran on Feb 28, but Trump formally notified Congress on March 2 about U.S. military operations against the country — 60 days ago on Friday. Ahead of his departure for a weekend in Florida, Trump was asked whether he would now seek approval from lawmakers. “It’s never been sought before, there’s been numerous, many, many times and nobody’s ever gotten it before, they consider it totally unconstitutional,” Trump told reporters ahead of his departure from the White House. “But we’re always in touch with congress. But, nobody’s ever sought it before, nobody’s ever asked for it before, it’s never been used before. Why should we be different?” It’s unclear who “they” was referring to, but it’s a new argument from the Trump administration.

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] grue@lemmy.world 77 points 3 days ago

Well, he's right: it is unconstitutional. Since only Congress is authorized by the Constitution to declare war, the President should get zero days to attack before Congress acts, not 60!

[-] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Half of Congress (i.e. Republicans) are so far up his ass they don't know what day it is.

[-] its_kim_love@lemmy.blahaj.zone 80 points 3 days ago

Everything I don't like is ~~communism~~ unconstitutional!

[-] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 24 points 3 days ago

Well that is how they treat the Bible

[-] j_elgato@leminal.space 13 points 3 days ago

Every word that comes out of his mouth is like a turd that falls into your drink.

STOP REPORTING on every demented utterance of this narcissistic sundowning ass-clown. He'd fucking condemn the existence of oxygen if it fit his agenda.

REPORT on the AGENDA.

Signal > Noise

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 29 points 3 days ago

Such a lovely world where this rapist claims something is unconstitutional without an explanation and no one presses him for one.

[-] zd9@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Can we just all come together and 8647?

86 means remove

[-] EndOfLine@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago

But why should it matter? 8 weeks ago he said that he only needed 4 week.

“It’s always been a four-week process. We figured it will be four weeks or so. It’s always been about a four-week process, so – as strong as it is, it’s a big country, it’ll take four weeks – or less,”

-- Donald Trump (2026-Mar-01)

source

[-] adespoton@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago

He failed to mention that it’s a rolling four weeks.

[-] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 days ago

Like Iran's "two months from a nuke" for the past 30 years.

[-] frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 14 points 3 days ago

You gotta wait for it to go through SCOTUS like everyone else, fuckhead. Tired of this crap.

[-] Triumph@fedia.io 23 points 3 days ago

He's telling them how to make their ruling.

[-] bedwyr@piefed.ca 9 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

They are his supplicants and we all know it. They will barely buck and mostly only to give the impression that they are independent by rejecting non-important issues while embracing the broader decisions that seize absolute power and overthrow the Republic.

[-] EntheoNaut@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 days ago

We’re all tired, boss.

[-] Archangel1313@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 days ago

This law simply requires the president to follow what's already in the Constitution. How is that "unconstitutional"?

[-] stretch2m@infosec.pub 8 points 3 days ago

The gall of that man to claim to stand for the Constitution, after shitting all over it.

[-] amgine@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

He can’t help but shit on everything

this post was submitted on 01 May 2026
186 points (98.4% liked)

politics

29631 readers
1534 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS