Without the approval of any legislature, U.S. President Donald Trump ordered a drone strike that killed a key Iranian political and military figure.
The move triggered dire warnings that the conflict between the two nations could escalate and further destabilize the Middle East.
While Iran vowed revenge for the death of Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of its elite Quds Force, world leaders have pleaded for cooler heads to prevail.
But the attack has also sparked dialogue over how — and under what conditions — a president can greenlight the use of military force.
Here’s a look at the powers of the U.S. president and how they have been used in the past:
Generally speaking, presidents have taken “very wide latitude” to pursue military action as commander-in-chief, said Matthew Dallek, a political historian at George Washington University.
For example, while in some U.S. conflicts there has been congressional authorization for use of force, there hasn’t been a formal declaration of war since the Second World War, he said.
- ‘Shock and disbelief’ after Manitoba school trustee’s Indigenous comments
- Several baby products have been recalled by Health Canada. Here’s the list
- Canadian food banks are on the brink: ‘This is not a sustainable situation’
- Invasive strep: ‘Don’t wait’ to seek care, N.S. woman warns on long road to recovery
As outlined in the U.S. constitution, the leader of the U.S. also commands the military.
“The president shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States,” states Article II section 2.
But there are limits on that power, at least on paper.
The War Powers Resolution was passed in the wake of the Vietnam War. It outlines the powers of Congress versus the president when it comes to armed conflict.
The president’s powers as commander-in-chief can be exercised only in accordance with statutory authorization from Congress, an attack that sparks an emergency or a declaration of war.
The law also requires the administration to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action or imminent actions.
Democrats pointed out that no prior authorization or consultation took place in the Soleimani case.
The airstrike, said House Leader Nancy Pelosi, “risks provoking further dangerous escalation of violence.”
“America — and the world — cannot afford to have tensions escalate to the point of no return,” she said in a statement Thursday.
On Saturday, the White House is expected to formally notify Congress, Reuters reported citing senior Congressional aides.
Other U.S. leaders have faced criticism over authorization for military action, including Bill Clinton during the 1999 bombing of Kosovo, and Barack Obama for dramatically escalating the drone warfare that started with George Bush.
“There has really been very little, if any, check on presidents using things like drone strikes and all the other military tools that are now at their disposal,” Dallek said.
Presidents have claimed broad latitude to attack terror targets because of a congressional resolution authorizing use of force following the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Dallek said.
That approval could factor into the Trump administration’s legal rationale for the strike that killed Soleimani, one national security expert said.
Bobby Chesney, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, told the Associated Press that the administration could argue it has authority to protect the troops in the Middle East who were dispatched under 2001 and 2002 authorizations.
That argument loses credibility if the Soleimani attack spurs a wider conflict, said Stephen Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law who specializes in national security law and the prosecution of war crimes.
“Even though the Executive Branch has pursued ever-broader theories of the President’s unilateral power to use force in self-defence, one of the critical considerations in each case has been whether the force comes with a risk of escalation,” Vladeck said by email.
“Where, as here, there is no question that it does, the argument that the president needed clearer buy-in from the legislature is much, much stronger.”
READ MORE: Iran promises ‘harsh retaliation’ for U.S. killing of top general Soleimani
Dallek pointed out that the Soleimani case is distinct because of his profile within Iran.
Soleimani was widely considered to be one of the country’s most powerful people. He had oversight over the country’s military strategy in the Middle East more broadly.
U.S. presidents have been “more restrained” when it comes to attacks on political targets, Dallek said, at least after the 1970s.
Then-president Gerald Ford made political assassination attempts by U.S. government employees illegal in 1976.
In attempting to justify the strike on Soleimani, Trump called him the “No. 1 terrorist anywhere in the world.”
One expert, a former policy adviser to Canadian foreign ministers, characterized Soleimani’s death as likely the most significant “assassination” in the war on terror.
“When we compare it to Osama bin Laden or al-Baghdadi, the head of ISIS, what differentiates Qassem Soleimani is that he had the backing of an entire state apparatus that had pursued revolutionary zeal around terrorism,” said Shuvaloy Majumdar, a Munk senior fellow with the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.
The Pentagon says Soleimani was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of U.S. and coalition troops. He was behind the attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad as well as other attacks on coalition bases in recent months, the agency said.
He was “actively developing” plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region, and the strike was launched to prevent further action against U.S. citizens.
Experts who spoke with the Associated Press said that a self-defence argument would make the attack justified in the eyes of U.S. and international law.
But they emphasized that the intelligence details that could form the basis of such an argument may never be released.
–With files from the Associated Press, Reuters and David Akin
Comments