Montana's Federal Delegation Asked About the Constitutionality of Operation Midnight Hammer
By Denise Rivette
On June 21, 2025, the United States military mission named Operation Midnight Hammer began surprising the world and raising questions of constitutional powers and their points of separation.
Lawshelf.com explains the basics as follows:
Congressional and Presidential War Powers under the US Constitution
You may hear on the news that the United States is at war with Syria, Iraq or ISIS. Technically, though, the United States is not “at war” with any of those under the constitutional definition of the term because Congress hasn’t declared war. Congress has not, in fact, declared war since 1942 (when it declared war on Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria during World War II). Does that mean that there was no Korean war, no Vietnam war, no war during Operation Desert Storm in 1991 or during a host of other engagements that the US has been involved in since World War II? Well, not quite. While Congress has the sole power to declare war, the President disposes of the United States military.
The Constitutional Framework
The framers of the Constitution divided war powers between the power to declare war and power to direct war. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution reads, “Congress shall have the power…to declare war” and Article II, Section 2 names the President as commander-in-chief of the armed forces.
This dichotomy is an example of checks and balances in action. The framers realized how important a decision it is for the United States to go to war and wanted to prevent any single entity from making it. Abraham Lincoln opined while in Congress: “…no one man should hold the power of bringing (that) oppression upon us.”
The War Powers Act of 1973 (officially named the War Powers Resolution) further clarified the roles of the executive and legislative branches as explained below by the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum:
As part of our system of governmental “checks and balances,” the law aims to check the executive branch’s power when committing U.S. military forces to an armed conflict without the consent of the U.S. Congress. It stipulates the president must notify Congress within 48 hours of military action and prohibits armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days.
In The Constitution Annotated, the complexities of “war powers” are outlined in part as follows:
Although courts and commentators occasionally discuss the war power as if it were a unified authority, the Supreme Court has explained that the Constitution spells out the war powers not in a single, simple phrase, but in many broad, interrelated provisions. In Article I, the Constitution empowers Congress to provide for the common defense through a set of enumerated authorities concerning war and national security.6 Central among these powers is Clause 11 of Article I, Section 8, which authorizes Congress to declare war. Clause 11 also empowers Congress to issue letters of marque and reprisal, which are instruments that permit private citizens to capture or destroy enemy property, and permits Congress to authorize rules concerning captures of enemy property on land or at sea.
According to Breaking Defense, on June 22, Pete Hegseth told reporters, “The president authorized a precision operation to neutralize the threats to our national interests posed by the Iranian nuclear program and the collective self-defense of our troops and our ally, Israel.”
Breaking Defense went on to report:
While Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Dan Caine said a battlefield assessment is ongoing to evaluate the strikes, Hegseth called it “an incredible and overwhelming success.”
Caine, a newly minted four-star general, went on to some detail just how [the] US carried out the strike, saying it involved more than 125 US aircraft, “dozens” of aerial refueling tankers, a guided missile submarine and firing approximately 75 precision guided weapons.
But Was It Constitutional?
While the mission appears to be a success and, after a few hiccups, the ceasefire between Iran and Israel seems to be holding, a question that continues to be raised is: Was President Trump acting within his powers under the Constitution when he bombed Iranian nuclear sites without Congressional consent?
I reached out on Sunday to the four members of Montana’s federal delegation as officials sworn to support and defend the Constitution to explore this issue which resulted in three questions:
Granted that the end result is laudable, what are your thoughts on Operation Midnight Hammer being conducted without congressional consent?
Do you think taking this action violated the Constitution? Why or why not?
What role do you expect Congress to play in future operations?
Senator Steve Daines’ Press Secretary, Gabby Wiggins replied:
“Senator Daines fully supports President Trump’s strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. The U.S. Constitution allows the Commander in Chief to respond to imminent threats, like Iran’s developing nuclear program, to defend our national interests. Iran should never be allowed to have a nuclear weapon, and the actions of President Trump and our brave military have made the world a safer place. Senator Daines looks forward to working with President Trump and his administration to further support our military and protect our national security.”
Because of the importance of hearing from our elected federal officials on Constitutional matters, the legislators and their teams were given a tentative deadline of Wednesday at noon and were informed that the deadline would be extended if they asked to provide as much time as they needed to respond. Representative Troy Downing, Senator Tim Sheehy and Representative Ryan Zinke provided no response beyond their initial social media posts on the bombing.
Everything the Trump administration has said about the bombing in Iran has been a lie. trump telegraphed the attack on Truth Social, and Iran had an opportunity to move radioactive materials. There is no evidence that the nuclear sites, which were only a few of the many sites Iran has, were “obliterated.“ At most, the attack delayed the ability of Iran to make a nuclear weapon by a few months. Although the trump administration never was consistent in their lies about Iran’s nuclear capability. Was it going to be tomorrow or in two weeks or in a year, or more? trmp nearly got us involved in World War III, because China and Russia began to get antsy and trump and Israel knew they had to back off. Hence the “ceasefire.” Which Iran bought into after they launched several missiles which did relatively little damage, because they told the United States and Israel that the missiles were coming. The inconsistency and the lie after lie are even more evidence of the dangerous incompetence of trump, and the danger trump poses to our service members by needlessly putting them in harm’s way. And it was also unnecessary. Trump tore up the agreement Obama had with Iran that kept them from developing a nuclear weapon, because Trump is obsessed with his predecessor, and he knows he will never be as intelligent or popular or accomplished as Obama.