“Operation Midnight Hammer,” the largest B-2 bomber strike in U.S. history, devastated Iranian nuclear sites on Saturday, immediately igniting a fervent war powers debate in Washington. The Trump administration orchestrated the massive operation, involving over 125 aircraft and 75 precision-guided weapons hitting Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan, without seeking prior congressional approval. Pentagon officials defended the action as a limited, targeted engagement against Iran’s nuclear weaponization ambitions, not a broader conflict.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, on “Face The Nation,” stressed the precise nature of the strike, clarifying it was “not an attack on Iran, it was not an attack on the Iranian people, this wasn’t a regime change move.” Instead, it was “designed to degrade and/or destroy three nuclear sites related to their nuclear weaponization ambitions.” Vice President Vance, on “Meet The Press,” reiterated that the U.S. was “at war with Iran’s nuclear program,” not Iran itself, and asserted the President’s authority to prevent WMD proliferation, promising a swift resolution.
However, the lack of congressional consultation has drawn sharp criticism. Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, co-author of a bipartisan War Powers Resolution, lambasted the administration on “Face The Nation,” arguing that “no imminent threat to the United States” justified bypassing Congress. He criticized lawmakers for not addressing the issue before the strike.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, however, quickly voiced his support for Trump on X, stating that “leaders in Congress were aware of the urgency” and the “imminent danger outweighed the time it would take for Congress to act.” He also maintained Trump’s respect for Congress’s Article I powers. Nevertheless, top Democrats, reportedly kept in the dark until after the operation, labeled the strike illegal. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) warned on CBS of increased risks for American troops and asserted that the scale of the attack constituted “hostilities” requiring congressional approval. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) agreed, emphasizing the absence of an “imminent threat” to justify the heightened danger to U.S. forces.
