Is there a plausible legal basis for going to war with Iran? Senate Democrats say no, and late yesterday forced a vote on a war powers resolution to bring the hostilities to a halt. It failed along largely partisan lines, 53-47, but Democrats say they intend to bring it up again, citing widening public disapproval of the war.

“We have created a catastrophe in the Middle East,” said Senator Chris Murphy, a Connecticut Democrat, who sponsored the resolution. “This is what you get when you put talk show hosts and real estate developers in charge of national security.”

The Trump administration has made it plain that providing a legal justification for the war isn’t terribly high on its list of concerns. Its response can be best summed up by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who accused Europeans of “pearl clutching” for citing international law for refusing to join with US military action.

But, in fact, the president can cite precedent.

Since its enactment in 1973, presidents have repeatedly ignored the War Powers Resolution requiring congressional support for military action abroad. Or as President George W. Bush did in 2003, claimed the law was unconstitutional, even as he sought congressional approval for the Iraq invasion.

The same goes for international law. Bush went to the United Nations Security Council for........

© The Spectator