Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Grand strategy / Senate fails to reclaim its war powers, but takes significant step
Grand strategy, Iran, Middle East

June 28, 2019

Senate fails to reclaim its war powers, but takes significant step

By Benjamin Friedman

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
June 28, 2019
Contact: press@defensepriorities.org

WASHINGTON, DC—On Friday, the U.S. Senate voted down an amendment by Sen. Tom Udall (NM) to reinforce the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution. Defense Priorities Policy Director Benjamin H. Friedman issued the following statement in response:

“The president has no constitutional authority to launch military strikes against any nation, except only to repel an actual or imminent attack. Our founders knew such power should not be entrusted to one person, so the Constitution divides war powers. The American people should decide through their elected representatives in the House and Senate.

“Even after 9/11, it was Congress who authorized President Bush to go after Al-Qaeda and the Taliban who harbored them in Afghanistan. President Bush went back to Congress to seek a new authorization to invade Iraq. Nearly two decades later, there is no credible argument that the current administration has the authority to go to war with Iran.

“Abdication of Congress’ war powers is an affront to Americans who have a right to be involved, through their representatives, in decisions about war and peace, and an assault on U.S. foreign policy.

“Iran is a middling power that poses no direct threat to the United States. The American people rightly oppose another Middle East war, which is likely to escalate into a prolonged, bloody quagmire or worse, rather than the quick, antiseptic airstrikes its proponents claim.

“War with Iran will harm U.S. security interests by dragging us into years or decades of greater enmity with Iran and its supporters in the region; keeping U.S. forces stuck there; making them targets; and creating massive, enduring costs. And it will fail to achieve a positive strategic outcome. War is unlikely to change Iran’s policies or regime—it is likely to encourage its pursuit of nuclear weapons and entrench hardline policies.

“Attempts to claw back Congress’ power are admirable and should be encouraged. Checks and balances lead to more effective foreign policies, more productive engagement with the world, and safeguard our domestic liberty.”

Author

Photo of Benjamin Friedman

Benjamin
Friedman

Policy Director

Defense Priorities

More on Middle East

ExplainerMilitary analysis, Air power, Basing and force posture, Land power, Naval power

Aligning global military posture with U.S. interests

By Jennifer Kavanagh and Dan Caldwell

July 9, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East

Why the Israel-Iran ceasefire feels like a strategic failure

By Alexander Langlois

July 8, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Hamas, Israel, Israel‑Iran, Middle East

Don’t bet on a Gaza ceasefire

July 3, 2025

op-edIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East

What lessons are foreign leaders taking from Donald Trump’s Iran bombing?

By Daniel DePetris

July 1, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, China, Iran, North Korea, Russia

There is no ‘axis of autocracy’

By Daniel DePetris

July 1, 2025

In the mediaIsrael‑Iran, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Nuclear weapons

What comes next in the Israeli-Iranian conflict?

Featuring Rosemary Kelanic and Jennifer Kavanagh

June 30, 2025

Events on Grand strategy

See All Events
virtualGreat power competition, Balance of power, China, Grand strategy, Middle East

Past Virtual Event: U.S.-China competition and the value of Middle East influence

June 10, 2025
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Russia

Past Virtual Event: China-Russia: Cooperation or a no-limits alliance?

April 3, 2025
virtualSyria, Balance of power, Basing and force posture, Counterterrorism, Middle East, Military analysis

Past Virtual Event: Syria after Assad: Prospects for U.S. withdrawal

February 21, 2025

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved