(Breitbart)—Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who once claimed to be Israel’s “guardian” in Congress, put out a statement late Saturday night opposing President Donald Trump’s airstrike on Iran’s nuclear sites.
After a delay of several hours, and long after his colleagues — Republican and Democratic — had reacted, Schumer issued a statement criticizing the attacks and backing legislation to limit Trump’s war powers.
NEW — Schumer, a longtime Iran hawk, comes out against Trump’s strikes, accusing POTUS of “erratic threats and no strategy”
Also announces he’ll support a War Powers vote pic.twitter.com/3dAmMiCdSP
— Andrew Desiderio (@AndrewDesiderio) June 22, 2025
The criticism from Schumer and other Democrats echoes their criticism of his successful airstrike on Iranian terror general Qasem Soleimani, when they again cited constitutional limitations on the commander-in-chief.
In reality, Trump’s actions are constitutional, provided that he complies with deadlines established by the existing War Powers Resolution of 1973, which allows the president to conduct war, provided that he report to Congress within 60 days. Few Democrats objected when President Barack Obama used his war powers — even in excess of those allowed by the War Powers Resolution, as Breitbart News has noted in the past:
[F]ew Democrats raised objections when President Barack Obama went to war — often exceeding the boundaries of his legal authority as president. The most notorious case was the Libya War, which President Obama launched in March 2011 without congressional authorization. He continued the war effort beyond the War Powers Resolution’s deadlines because, the administration argued, the U.S. was not engaged in “hostilities” but “leading from behind.”
Some on the left bent over backwards to defend Obama’s unconstitutional war. Former Yale Law School dean Harold Koh was once “one of the country’s foremost defenders of the notion that the president of the United States can’t wage wars without the approval of Congress,” the New York Times noted, but later became “the administration’s defender of the right to stay engaged in a conflict against Libya without Congressional approval.”
Later, when Obama was mulling military action against Syria, an administration that came to power by arguing that the Iraq War had been waged “without strong international support” argued that war against Syria would have been justified even without the backing of the United Nations Security Council because there was no way to win Russian support regardless, and because the threat of weapons of mass destruction against civilians was dire. Few objected.
- Read More: breitbart.com
