For Donald Trump the Constitution is sometimes a stumbling-block, sometimes a cudgel, but never a rulebook. While reading more about the power over war in the Constitution it's become even more clear to me that the founding fathers never intended a president to be able to launch a war the way Trump has in Iran.

The linked site (constitution.congress.gov) is a great resource for reading more about the drafting of the Constitution and the debates that shaped its construction. Read about the debate of "[making vs declaring](https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C11-2-2-3/ALDE_00013911/)" war as an example.

On war powers James Madison once wrote to Thomas Jefferson:

>The constitution supposes, what the History of all Govts. demonstrates, that the \[Executive\] is the branch of power most interested in war, & most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care, vested the question of war in the \[Legislature\]

Prominent federalist James Wilson said this at the 1787 ratifying convention:

>Th\[e\] \[Constitution’s\] system will not hurry us into war; it is calculated to guard against it. It will not be in the power of a single man, or a single body of men, to involve us in such distress; for the important power of declaring war is vested in the legislature at large: this declaration must be made with the concurrence of the House of Representatives: from this circumstance we may draw a certain conclusion that nothing but our national interest can draw us into a war.

  
I don't think anybody here needs to read this and so I thought about sharing it in other subs but it's so self-evident that I see no use in trying to justify the current administration's actions as based in love and reverence for the Constitution. Is there a good faith, Constitution-based argument for Trump's war in Iran? I don't think so.



Legislative and Executive Branch Views on the Declare War Clause