A familiar fight over war powers, and a harder question about moral consistency 

The images coming out of Iran are shocking. Regional demonstrations over food prices turned into nationwide protests seeking freedom from the regime. 

Iran’s government has responded with brutal violence, even worse than usual. Some reports estimate the regime has killed up to 20,000 peaceful protesters in just a couple of weeks.  

President Trump is considering military action to stop the violence, emboldened by the successful capture of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela.  

Most Democrats in Congress fall into one of two camps:  

1. They condemn Iran but oppose unauthorized military action.
2. Silence. 

The first is a familiar stance in Washington, that both parties have taken over the years. The second can be much more concerning – especially for those who have been outspoken about Israel and the rest of the Middle East in recent years. 

Iran War Powers: A Familiar Debate 

It’s the age-old dilemma in American politics: the president is the commander-in-chief of the military, but Congress is responsible for declaring war.  

So can the President strike Iran without approval from Congress? 

A 1970s law called the War Powers Resolution tried to find a compromise. It says the president can use military force without Congress’s approval, but only for up to 90 days. After that, if Congress hasn’t voted to approve the deployment, the mission must end and the troops must come home.  

There’s just one hiccup: since the law was passed, presidents have deployed the military without approval nearly 200 times, but Congress has never successfully used the War Powers Resolution to stop a military operation. 

That hasn’t stopped them from trying. 

In fact, members of Congress nearly always raise the same concerns about unauthorized military deployments whenever the other party controls the White House.  

Sometimes the criticisms are framed as being about preventing a broader war, sometimes it’s about how the strikes are carried out and who’s being targeted, sometimes it’s just because Congress wasn’t brought in. 

Rep. Pete Aguilar, the House Democratic Conference Chair, echoed the same sentiments recently, saying Democrats don’t “want people exercising their opinions to die in the streets, but the president needs to consult with Congress on actions that involve the United States military.” 

“It’s got to be debated by Congress,” Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer added. 

The Democrats Who Don’t Condemn Iran 

Many more Congressional Democrats have not yet weighed in on what’s happening in Iran. 

That’s not necessarily a bad thing. This is a rapidly developing story, so lawmakers may be waiting for more detailed briefings from trusted U.S. intelligence before making a statement. Others might be hyper-focused on local issues like the looming government shutdown that could come at the end of this month. Sill others might refrain from commenting on foreign affairs as a matter of principle.  

But it becomes concerning when members who yelled “free Palestine” the loudest are now silent on Iran. 

Take Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan. The day after the October 7 terrorist attacks, when Hamas killed over 1,200 innocent people and took 254 hostages – Rep. Tlaib released a statement blaming Israel’s “apartheid government” for creating what she called the “conditions that can lead to resistance.” 

Most other Democrats, including several who would later become among Israel’s sharpest critics, responded differently in the immediate aftermath of October 7. They condemned Hamas’s attacks outright and expressed sympathy for the victims. But over the months that followed, many shifted their focus from condemning Hamas to condemning Israel’s military response in Gaza – in some cases escalating their rhetoric significantly. 

That escalation was not confined to the party’s progressive fringe. Rep. Katherine Clark, the second-highest-ranking Democrat in the House, later accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza – one of the most serious allegations under international law. Over time, similar claims spread across parts of the Democratic caucus, culminating in 21 House Democrats co-sponsoring a resolution accusing Israel of genocide. 

Using that same standard of moral urgency, we examined the public statements of seven prominent Congressional Democrats who have accused Israel of genocide in Gaza. No Labels reviewed their office’s press releases as well as their official Facebook and Twitter activity this year.  

So far, none of them have condemned Iran’s mass killings. 

One can question and criticize the Israeli response to October 7, but it’s undeniable their response was triggered by Hamas’s horrific terrorist attack.  

Iran, on the other hand, has waged an unprovoked and unrelenting assault on its own people, for the “crime” of protesting for better governance.  

And yet, Reps. Rashida Tlaib and Katherine Clark, along with many of the most outspoken critics of Israel, are refusing to condemn the mass killings in Iran. 

The issue is not whether Congress should endorse U.S. military action. Lawmakers can reasonably oppose intervention. But when outrage is deployed selectively – thunderous in one case, absent in another – it raises uncomfortable questions about consistency, credibility, and what principles truly guide America’s loudest voices on human rights.