Here are two posts by law professor and author Jonathan Turley.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va) told Fox that "the Constitution does not give the President the right to initiate military action." That is entirely incorrect. The Constitution does not give a president the right to declare war. However, presidents are allowed to use military forces…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) January 4, 2026
That tweet in full reads as follows.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va) told Fox that "the Constitution does not give the President the right to initiate military action." That is entirely incorrect. The Constitution does not give a president the right to declare war. However, presidents are allowed to use military forces without such a declaration...
...Democratic presidents routinely launched attacks in other countries without any objection from Sen. Kaine. Obama not only killed an American citizen not charge with any crime but attacked Libya's capital and attacked its military to cause a regime change without consulting…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) January 4, 2026
That tweet in full reads as follows.
...Democratic presidents routinely launched attacks in other countries without any objection from Sen. Kaine. Obama not only killed an American citizen not charge with any crime but attacked Libya's capital and attacked its military to cause a regime change without consulting with Congress.
So that explains it.
We are at times forced to do things we prefer not to do. Leaders have to make difficult decisions. They may take a hit for some of those decisions, politically, personally, or within the court of public perception. Presidents are not kings. That is very important. They do, however, possess executive power and are in a position to make some decisions executively, meaning without obtaining the consent or hearing the advice of Congress. The line between lawful execution of power and executive overreach should not be obscure.
Recommended
Precedent does not equal lawful. It can and should and does, in many cases, but there most assuredly can exist bad precedents. In looking into the law, certain issues that arise can concern a fundamental letter or a principle of guidance. The method of selecting a president of the United States should be taken fundamentally. There are actual values and parameters that set the table for that process. The right of peaceable assembly should be considered principally. Though it is enumerated as something regarding which Congress shall make no law, it is also established as a principle of freedom that the American people can enjoy. The difference between latitudinal decision-making power and absolute boundaries should be understood clearly, respecting war declarations and using military forces. But going even further, the president can act with Congress whether the law prescribes that he do so or not.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member