The widespread air attack ordered by US President Donald Trump against nuclear facilities inside Iran, at dawn on Sunday, sparked a political storm in Congress, amid direct accusations of "violating the constitution" and exceeding his powers to use military force without a legislative authorization.

accusations of violating the constitution

Principal deputies considered that Trump's decision violates the constitutional article that limits the right to declare war to Congress, stressing that the president "took a dangerous step without consulting Parliament, providing clear justifications, or presenting a strategic plan for the post -strike."

statements from the leaders of the Democratic Party

The leader of the democratic majority of the Senate, Chak Schumer, said in an official statement: “The president may not drag the country into a war of this size without the approval of Congress.

While Senator Jacques Reed, a member of the Armed Forces Committee, described the strike as a "huge gambling", adding: "The administration did not make any clear vision of the next step, nor an assessment of the risks of possible escalation."

Surface information and limited notification

The Associated Press reported that only a limited number of Congress leaders were pre -informed, including the Speaker of the Republican Parliament Mike Johnson and the leader of the Republican majority in the Senate John Thun, but without passing through the official consultation mechanism or calling for an emergency session.

Shomer spokesman confirmed that the notification was "very superficial", which does not include sufficient details about the nature of the strikes or its strategic goals.

Divide within the Republican Party

Although some Republican representatives were quick to support Trump's decision, and considered it "necessary to prevent Iran from owning a nuclear weapon", the reservations were not lost on the ranks of the party.

Senator John Thun said: “I stand by the president in this delicate process, and I call for the safety of our forces abroad.”

But other Republican personalities expressed concern about the absence of an integrated plan for the post -attack, which may confuse the unity of the party position, especially at a sensitive time witnessing decisive discussions on the draft national security law worth $ 350 billion.

between necessity and constitution

While the American administration insists that the strike against Iran was "defensive and necessary", Trump's critics see it as a "clear infringement of the constitution", and that its consequences will not stop at the borders of Iranian geography, but may extend to Washington itself through stormy discussions that may reshape the relationship between the executive and legislative authorities.