A key point of contention surrounding the Trump administration’s precision strike on Iranian nuclear sites is whether “Operation Midnight Hammer” constitutes “hostilities” requiring congressional approval, or a merely “limited, targeted engagement” as the administration claims. The Saturday operation, a massive B-2 bomber strike hitting Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan, was carried out without prior congressional authorization. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President Vance defended the strikes as limited and targeted at nuclear weaponization, not broader conflict.
Rubio explained on “Face The Nation” that the strike aimed to “degrade and/or destroy three nuclear sites related to their nuclear weaponization ambitions.” Vance, on “Meet The Press,” cited the President’s “clear authority” to prevent WMD proliferation, assuring that this engagement would be decisive.
However, the interpretation of “hostilities” is being sharply debated. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) unequivocally stated on CBS that the “U.S. sending this massive set of Tomahawk missiles and B-2 bombers and bunker busters on three Iranian nuclear sites is hostilities,” thereby triggering the War Powers Act and requiring congressional consent. Republican Rep. Thomas Massie, co-author of a bipartisan War Powers Resolution, also argued that “no imminent threat” existed to justify bypassing Congress.
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. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) agreed, emphasizing the absence of an “imminent threat” to justify the heightened danger to U.S. forces.