Contributor: Trump is waging an illegal, costly war in Iran and no one is stopping him

By Erwin ChemerinskyContributing writer 

Sept. 7, 2026 3 AM PT

The war in Iran continues, and very few people seem to care that it’s clearly illegal and unconstitutional. What does that say about the rule of law in this country, when the president can wage a pointless war at enormous cost in dollars and human lives without authorization?

The bombings this week in Larak Island by American military forces, and the retaliation by Iran on U.S. bases in Jordan, is just the latest phase of this protracted war that began on Feb. 28 and became unlawful on May 1, when the unauthorized campaign reached its 60-day threshold, violating the War Powers Resolution, a federal law adopted in 1973 over President Nixon’s veto.

The resolution states that the president shall withdraw troops from any involvement in hostilities after 60 days unless Congress has declared war, has authorized a 60-day extension or is physically incapable of meeting as a result of an armed attack upon the U.S. The president can extend this deadline by 30 days if he certifies to Congress in writing that “unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces.”

Congress neither declared war nor authorized an extension allowing the continued military action. There was no attack on the U.S. and President Trump has made no attempt to extend this for 30 days. And so, by any definition — whether American law, international law or common sense — the U.S. has been fighting an illegal war for nearly four months.

For a time, Trump appeared to actually pay attention to the War Powers Resolution, which is meant to provide a check on presidential power and to ensure that there is careful deliberation and approval by Congress before the U.S. is enmeshed in a prolonged conflict.

On April 7, he suggested that the 60-day clock under the law was stopped because there was a pause in the hostilities due to a ceasefire. But there’s nothing in the act about stopping the clock under such circumstances; the law is explicit that troops must be withdrawn 60 days after hostilities begin unless one of the exceptions in the law is met. Besides, there have been many bombings, blockades and military actions from both sides, most recently on Sunday.

Congress, too, appeared for a moment to care about the War Powers Resolution. In June, both houses passed a concurrent resolution under the War Powers Resolution directing the president to remove U.S. armed forces from hostilities with Iran. Trump simply ignored that directive and Congress has done nothing about it.

The War Powers Resolution is vital because it reinforces the Constitution’s allocation of power over warmaking. The drafters of the Constitution aimed to make sure that two branches of government were involved in any major military action. Article I gives Congress the power to declare war, while Article II makes the president the commander in chief of the Army and Navy.

The fundamental idea is for Congress to decide whether the country will be in a war and, if so, to make it the president’s role to choose how to wage it. This was expressed by none other than President Washington, who declared that “no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after [Congress has] deliberated on the subject, and authorized such a measure.”

The Constitution and the War Powers Resolution exist to provide protection from exactly what we are seeing in Iran: a president waging a hugely costly war with no apparent purpose. For a time, Trump articulated his goals, including a regime change in Iran and the elimination of its nuclear capacity. It is apparent that neither will happen, but the war goes on.

There are certainly ways of enforcing the War Powers Resolution and ending this illegal war. Congress could use its power of the purse to cut off funding for it, as it did in 1971, when it prohibited federal funds from being used for military actions in Cambodia, and in 1973, when it effectively ended the Vietnam War by stopping the flow of money for it.

In the 1980s, Congress repeatedly passed the Boland Amendment, prohibiting government financial and military assistance to the “Contras,” an anti-communist rebel group fighting to overthrow the Sandinista government in Nicaragua. In 1994, Congress outlawed the use of federal money for military actions in Somalia.

The federal courts could also declare the war in Iran illegal and unconstitutional, and could enjoin the president from continuing to violate the Constitution and laws of the United States.

But neither seems likely. Republicans in Congress have shown no willingness to stand up to Trump in any meaningful way. And starting with the Vietnam War, courts have consistently refused to consider the constitutionality of presidential warmaking.

The profound question, then, is how are we a nation under the rule of law if there is nothing to stop the president from violating the Constitution? The answer is frightening, but that is exactly the failure revealed by the ongoing illegal war in Iran.

Erwin Chemerinsky is the dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law.