This makes it abundantly clear the Iran strike isn't legal

[bigtree]

I am not a law of war expert. I don’t play one on TV. But I wanted to share some basic principles and offer some suggestions for further reading as we watch the news unfold in Iran. The White House hasn’t offered the public a reason for the attack on Iran that would make it legal, and CNN is reporting they haven’t provided a “full accounting” to members of Congress either. This afternoon, Jake Sherman at Punchbowl News reported that “A senior Trump administration official said that U.S. intelligence ‘had indicators’ that the Iranians were going to use their missiles ‘preemptively, but if not, simultaneous’ to any American action on Iran.”

But if the real reason for our attack was warding off casualties from an Iranian first strike, you would have expected to hear the White House using that explanation from the start, which they didn’t. And now that we have struck, we haven’t seen any proportional response, “simultaneous” or otherwise, from Iran. The legality of the U.S. strike is, at best, highly questionable.

Of course, we all know that under the Constitution, Congress, not the president, has the power to declare war. We also know that for the past few decades, the executive branch has been assuming more of that power, adopting a “beg for forgiveness,” rather than an “ask for permission” stance. But no one has been as brazen about it as Donald Trump, who has bombed 7 different countries in just over a year in office and is at in a second time in Iran, after claiming, in June 2025, that he had “obliterated” their nuclear program. It’s not a good thing when the man with the nuclear codes is punch-drunk on the amount of power at his disposal, and it behooves us all to keep a close watch.

The UN Charter prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state in Article 2(4), which reads, “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” Launching attacks, like the U.S. strike on Iran, is generally illegal. There are exceptions for self-defense against an armed attack (Article 51) or an attack authorized by the Security Council, but neither of those is in play here.



Treaties ratified by the U.S. Senate, like the UN Charter, have the status of federal laws under Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution, which reads, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” (emphasis added). Upholding them is part of a president’s duties and the oath of office he takes under the “take care” clause of the Constitution.

read more: https://joycevance.substack.com/p/the-law-of-war

[malaise]

1. Get thee to the greatest page

Rec

[cachukis]

2. My sense, trump has been sold on this attack for

some time. Witcoff and Kushner have connections with BiBi. BiBi, had trump's blessing if they could put together a good target for Israeli benefit. Mossad intelligence picked yesterday. Our people were ready to go sans coordinates.
When coordinates set, off to the races.
Now what?

[Wounded Bear]

4. Yeah, well, trump don't do that "now what" shit...

[cachukis]

5. Uncharted fog of war.

[pfitz59]

14. Yes indeed

Khamenei is dead, but there are thousands of mullahs and a million 'revolutionary guards'. Expecting the Iranian people to just throw off the yoke and invite Trump into Tehran for a victory parade is absurd. This is likely to be a larger rerun of the Iraqi-Iran War which ended in a stalemate. Asymmetric warfare comes into play with likely terrorist attacks in unlikely places. And who's in charge of anti-terrorism in the US? Cosplay Barbie Noem! God help us all.

[sop]

3. I'm no longer certain what "illegal" means in America today.

[MontanaMama]

11. THIS.

When nobody stands in his way, nothing matters anymore.

[popsdenver]

33. Bravo MM

for you Zeroing in on THE exact center of the problem...........

[leftstreet]

13. +1

[debsy]

50. Yup!

The people in control of our government have all gone rogue and believe they all have immunity from everything they do because of the SCROTUS immunity ruling that gave “the president” complete immunity when acting in an official capacity. They all know Donald Trump will corruptly pardon all of them for any lawless act and they are behaving with impunity. They are lawless.

[JT45242]

6. Seems like the attack falls into high crimes and misdemeanors territory

Should be grounds to impeach and remove hegseth, trump, etc.

Lying about (like lying about WMD before or gulf of Tonkin) the reasons is just par for the course when the super wealthy want the government to start a war with another country.

[spanone]

7. K&R

[Baitball Blogger]

8. Trump is trying to force the Congress to accept this quagmire,

so they can be criticized for wasting time on the Epstein file during a time of war.

Congress, don't take the bait!

[Greg_In_SF]

9. The War Powers Resolution

makes no mention of threats to the homeland so they'll just say there were threats to US interests.

[bigtree]

10. they'll never be legally sanctioned for this

...all of the debate will go into the question of putting limits on his authority.

Legislators will decide whether they believe the strikes are in our national interest, an increased number of their constituents at the end of their rope with Israel because of Gaza; most of them completely oblivious to any ties to countries hit like Oman, for instance.

I'd guess lawmakers will be advantaged in seeking a resolution (at some point, more likely after the 60 day limit on presidential authority to commit troops expires) by the utter indifference of Americans to any stated need for this militarization and mobilization.

I mean, we aren't going to wind up in some international court as the legalities imply. It will mainly be a factor in the political debate in Congress and the public. Maybe a factor in an impeachment, or some lawsuit by Iranians against the U.S., like Iraqis sought.

[bif]

12. Clearly it doesn't matter if it's legal or not

He does whatever he wants and absolutely no one ever challenges him.

[bigtree]

21. that's right

...it's a political question if we're talking about holding him accountable to this law; one which has always had a loophole wide enough for a lengthy stretch of warring before Congress can weigh in.

I want to say that republicans aren't likely to go along with any limits on his authority right now, but I'm not sure this is a done deal because this should be hitting Americans like a rock to the head.

At any rate, they'll need some 7 Democrats to continue past 30 days - not to mention more of the money they've been blowing through with the reported hundreds of missiles launched, each a small fortune.

What I've been thinking is that, with the attacks by Iran on others in the region, he may put together a coalition of those U.S. interests to keep the money flowing, so we may well see him continue beyond what Congress authorizes or wants.

Like you said, he does what he wants in this present political equation, with relative impunity.

[Blue Owl]

15. The weak, impotent, make-up clad strongman

In his mind Donny is like one of his photoshopped Rambo warriors — in reality he is the haggard, repulsive, morbidly obese Jabba the Hut creature

[UTUSN]

16. K&R

[GiqueCee]

17. I am reminded...

... of a frightening remark made by Nosferatu Suppository-Head at the beginning of the Orange Gargoyle's first term: "the President's decisions will not be questioned." Or words very close to that dictatorial edict.
Trump believes that being President bestows endless power and authority without the constraints of courts or Congress. In his fevered mind he is an infinite power unto himself, and God help anyone that doubts it.
If he does try to rig or even cancel the mid-term elections, then regime change by any means necessary will be imperative. We cannot allow a petulant man-baby to destroy America, which has been his goal from Day One. And the malignant scum surrounding and enabling him had better start looking for countries with no extradition treaties.
There cannot be any "truth and reconciliation"; it's already been demonstrated that such a course of action just leaves the door wide open for those on the Dark Side to come back and do it all again, this time avoiding the mistakes of the past, and escalating the savagery and bloodshed by several orders of magnitude, making ICE invasions look like a Sunday School picnic.
This is as real as it gets, people, so appeasement is not an option. Psychopaths cannot be trusted for an instant, and we've got the Godzilla of psychopaths in the Oval Office, and he's driving the country off a cliff. If he isn't stopped, he will destroy America, and then the world.

[bigtree]

24. yep

...and then there's the other side of the equation that would come into play if we take control of Congress and squeeze the money flowing to his regime.

There is no actual lever for Democrats to effectively restrain him right now except advocating against it from the elevation of their offices, and hopefully getting enough Americans to weigh their objections in to their elected officials.

They're spooked by the midterms, and that's the wild card here. Optimum time for political action from the people, and I wouldn't count us out just yet.

[GiqueCee]

29. I'll never count us out...

... but with only dishwater declarations from those who are elected to defend our institutions and Constitution, the road back to decency is likely to be a lot longer. There are some speaking out, even at their own peril, but those at the top should be a damn sight louder in their condemnations of Trump's lawless treachery.
Have a pleasant afternoon.

[Just Jerome]

43. As I recall,

he said, "You will obey. You will not question. You will obey."

[GiqueCee]

45. I imagine he repeated that thought...

... in many ways in order to ensure compliance with Der Fuhrer's capricious demands of unquestioning loyalty that he did not – and does not – deserve. One I found is, "... the powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned."
Regardless of the exact phrasing, Miller's psychotic inclinations are on full display, and rival those of his boss.

[LoisB]

18. IT doesn't need a "reason" for anything he does.

[Callie1979]

19. I'm telling you guys, pushing this line is going to blow back on us.

EVERY president has pushed this limit during their term.
We see Iranians in the streets celebrating around the world & even INSIDE Iran. Putin lamenting the loss of his great ally. Iran has been the biggest help to Putin in his war on UKR.
Yes, we should speak out about Congress being involved. But we also should be speaking about the opportunity the Iranian have at this point in time.
The saddest thing is that this operation needs to succeed but if THAT happens TRUMP gets the credit. If it FAILS its bad for Trump but its also bad for US, UKR & many other nations.
I wish he'd never launched the attack, but at this point the smartest move for OUR leaders is to NOT simply blast Trump
Come at me if you will, but I'm looking forward to Nov & '28 and WINNING is the ONLY thing that matters.

[bigtree]

26. I dunno

...there's a growing pushback and objection already demonstrated by Americans taking to the streets to protest his lawlessness.

That's been the primary theme of the historic protests, so I'd expect this will add to that perception of Americans that this president is out of control and needs to be reigned in.

The key to getting Americans to oppose this is to remind them of their own aggravated interests, and questioning whether these actions have anything to do with the challenges they face in their everyday lives.

It's a lurid spectacle of autocracy and tyranny that Americans have already rejected repeatedly in protests and interim elections. I'd think the miscalculation is all on Trump and the republicans who've given him free reign.

[Callie1979]

31. I think the odds ARE against him. BUT; what if it WORKS? There's a chance.

What if the people DO take control & the radicals are tossed out? It would be a great thing for the Middle East & the rest of the world. And we dont want to look like we DONT want the people freed. It's tough to be in a spot where standing against HIM is standing against all those people in the streets celebrating. Every post or statement critical of trumps actions needs to also include support for the people of Iran.

And thank you for a reasoned & polite post. Usually when I'm the voice of a "dissenting opinion" I get slammed or even alerted & hidden. Which is ridiculous.

[OhioBlue]

37. I think this take is what kept us in Iraq for 10 years.

The conversations sound the same. 1. Be afraid... be very afraid... the smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud. 2. Iraq was negotiating and allowing weapons inspectors in. 3. The administration bombs before negotiations and inspectors complete their work 4. Those poor Iraqis need us to free them from the dictator 5. Kill said dictator, film those that are happy and play on B roll endlessly 6. Declare victory 7. Spend 10 years embroiled in war and insurgency costing hundreds of thousands of lives, Iraqis and US soldiers suffer life long injuries, decimate infrastructure, balloon US deficits, create refugee crisis all across the region.

[Callie1979]

44. Iran is a much bigger sponsor of terrorists plus being Russia's #1 helper in UKR.

Plus, the attack has already happened. I've said Congress SHOULD be demanding to be a part of what's going on; but the PEOPLE of Iran have been getting killed by the 1000s trying to free themselves from THEIR dictators. We need to be smart about OUR response to we can get of OUR dictator's henchmen in Nov & his successor in '28

[popsdenver]

34. Sadly Callie

If you think there was massive, documented corruption on the Republican's part, in past elections.....1980, 2000, 2004, 2016, 2020, 2024......We ain't seen nothing yet.....

[Pluvious]

20. Original link...

Link to tweet

[Ol Janx Spirit]

22. Sadly, it's abundantly unclear when serious people like Joyce Vance will be able...

...to break through the noise and make a difference again.

A large part of the reason President [REDACTED] forces his stupid opinion into every aspect of our lives is so that voices like Vance's can't ever rise above the din.

It is how MAGAs operate in general. By the time you've managed to communicate a cohesive rebuttal to whatever stupid thing they said last they've tuned it out and moved on to the next stupid thing--knowing full well that what you were saying is thoughtful and reasoned and must be drowned out immediately.

[Callie1979]

32. Pres REDACTED! Hahahahahahahahaha love it.

[c-rational]

23. Great post bigtree. Thanks.

[Uncle Joe]

25. It wasn't legal, moral, ethical, nor wise

Thanks for the the bigtree

[Gordcanuck]

27. IT is also abundantly clear that

the U.S. is economically dependant on wars and conflict with or without resolution.

[Sneederbunk]

28. However, Alito, Thomas and Kavanaugh would approve.

[bigtree]

30. right

...official duties and all of that invention of theirs.

I think it reinforces the consensus among most Americans that this president isn't respecting the laws he's insisting everyone else follow, as he take hijacks our manpower and resources for his costly imperialistic wars of choice.

That's not just people talking, not this close to the midterms in which republicans are spooked silly.

But, yeah, lawsuits relating to his presidential prerogatives are an ultimate dead end against that court's maga majority.

[ChicagoTeamster]

35. Trump's board of peace ends the United Nations. His Executive of War instructs Generals to disregard Geneva Convention

The US just sanctioned attorneys on the ICC at the Hague to start killing that international legal body. They are going to make the rules based on what countries they want to take over and make money off of. That's why they have crooked business people and nepo babies like Kushner, Witkoff, Lauder etc advising them and doing the negotiations.

[bigtree]

36. moot in his term

...but the realignment after he leaves will be monumental and much more defining than this antithetical aberration.

His board of peace is a ponzi scheme that will collapse under the weight of it's investors, most of whom are throwing money, irretrievably, into a pit of crazy.

It's nothing but play-to-pay which will be easily marginalized as graft and swept aside by a new Democratic administration ahead of an era of reform, much like post-Watergate.

Most of this smothering lawlessness is due to a temporary political bubble that's due to burst within months, and won't outlast his presidency.

[OhioBlue]

38. Just like Iraq - Weapons inspector David Kay testified there were no weapons of mass destruction

The CIA (Valerie Plame group) discovered the aluminum tubes that the administration alleged were purchased by Iraq for nuclear weapons was unlikely. Bush admin doctors intelligence. Joseph Wilson calls them out. Scooter Libby outs Plame. Bush allies engage in character assassination against Wilson, Plame, Kay and anyone that goes against the narrative. Nobody suffers consequences except Libby who was then granted clemency by Bush and pardoned by Trump

[DemocracyForever]

39. U.S. constitution gives Congress war declaration power

NOT the Executive branch. I learned this in elementary school. This unconstitutional Iran attack is sadly part of the ongoing Epstein files coverup.

[Greg_In_SF]

40. We have been in

close to 200 military conflicts without a single declaration of war.

[bigtree]

41. it's a further confirmation of his lawlessness

...another major fault against him in the political book of wrongs.

Many Americans still remember the two decades consequences of wars of choice waged, ostensibly, on behalf of 'liberating' some ME population or the other.

Look at Trump's justifications for this foolishness which included opportunistic references to elections most Americans agree are settled, including the one in 2024 he actually won, claiming some interference other than the crimes he committed and was charged with.

He's assuming Americans are fools, and maybe he's right about his followers, but he's not doing this at some pinnacle of popularity.

I'd expect this to hit like a rock in the head of Americans already struggling with the consequences of the Trump tariff economy; already uneasy about the authoritarian violence and deaths at the hands of this government's agents; and should be thrilled, I'd imagine, to find he's off on another nation-building misadventure without a good reason; without legal justification; and without their consent.

I'd guess they'll do something about that when they get the opportunity to vote again; even some republicans who complained the last election that they didn't want anymore nation-building wars of choice.

And let's not forget that almost all those presidents you're likely thinking about acted in concert with our allies under the umbrella of NATO and U.N. findings, presentations, and votes. This is insanely void of any of that validation.

I'd also think that breach of public trust might loom large in an impeachment that featured the myriad other lies and fraud committed in just this short term, because, it isn't likely to be a court of law that's going to make a definitive judgment on this; it's the American people in just months from now.

I know republicans are sick over this because they're already in hot water over the midterms. I mean, that's the real starting game for anyone opposed to this.

[Martin Eden]

42. It's too late "to do this the right way." Congressional authorization is required BEFORE going to war

The only right thing to do now is to remove this POtuS from office, and withdraw our forces.

[progressoid]

46. So?

It's been obvious for the last year+ that this administration doesn't give a flying fuck about laws.

Even in the unlikely event that congress does something, what are the consequences? It's time to fight this in the court of public opinion. We can't count on our elected and judicial officials to do the right thing. IMHO.

[usonian]

47. There's "good" reason.

If you have hideous crimes to hide that would get you torn limb from limb by your own followers.

They are still clueless.

[Beartracks]

48. Trump, and by extension his submissive Republican lackeys, have no use for democracy or the Constitution. n/t

[Wednesdays]

49. Oh, but the strikes on Iran were perfectly justifiable.

So said a poster yesterday here on DU, who has for some reason deleted such posts.
Something something ASSASSINATION OF THE PRESIDENT something something.