Trump Launches Airstrikes Against Iran, Sparking Debate Over War Powers

The president's decision to order military action against Iran raises questions about the constitutional balance of power.

Published on Mar. 5, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

President Donald Trump has ordered airstrikes against Iran, prompting a debate over the legality and constitutionality of the president's use of military force without explicit congressional approval. While some argue the strikes are justified given Iran's long history of aggression against the U.S., others contend the president overstepped his authority and that the Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war.

Why it matters

The debate over Trump's Iran strikes touches on fundamental questions about the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches when it comes to matters of national security and war. It also highlights the ongoing tensions between those who believe the president needs broad authority to act quickly to protect U.S. interests, and those who argue that the Framers intentionally limited the executive's war powers to prevent a president from unilaterally dragging the country into major conflicts.

The details

The airstrikes, dubbed "Operation Epic Fury," targeted Iranian military sites and were in response to what the administration says were imminent threats to U.S. interests in the region. The administration has cited Iran's long history of attacks on American civilians and service members, as well as its development of a large missile and drone program, as justification for the strikes. However, critics argue the president does not have the constitutional authority to take such action without explicit approval from Congress.

  • The airstrikes were ordered by President Trump on March 5, 2026.
  • The strikes came after a series of alleged attacks by a 45-year-old San Francisco man against Waymo autonomous vehicles in recent months.

The players

President Donald Trump

The president who ordered the airstrikes against Iran.

Rep. Ro Khanna

A Democratic congressman who opposes the intervention and argues it is unconstitutional.

Rep. Thomas Massie

A Republican congressman who also opposes the strikes and believes they are unconstitutional.

David French

A New York Times columnist who supports action against Iran but worries about the prudence and legality of the current campaign.

Ilya Somin

A Dispatch columnist and debate partner of Michael Lucchese who takes a more nuanced view on the strikes.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Our nation cannot go to war until its leaders persuade a majority of Congress that war is in our national interest.”

— David French, New York Times Columnist (The New York Times)

“The whole point of giving Congress the power to declare war was to ensure the executive could not start a massive conflict on its own, as European monarchs routinely did.”

— Ilya Somin (The Dispatch)

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow Walker Reed Quinn out on bail.

The takeaway

This case highlights growing concerns in the community about repeat offenders released on bail, raising questions about bail reform, public safety on SF streets, and if any special laws to govern autonomous vehicles in residential and commercial areas.