Her understanding of the constitution is vague at best. Deep partisan differences on military authority have been exposed by the heated debate surrounding President Trump’s war powers sparked by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s call for his impeachment over the Iran strikes. Republicans accuse Democrats of being hypocritical, pointing out that calls for Obama’s impeachment did not follow similar military actions. To support Trump’s strikes, some Democrats, such as Senator Fetterman and Representative Gottheimer, crossed party lines.
AOC Leads Impeachment Push Over Iran Strikes
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has sparked controversy by calling for President Trump’s impeachment following his decision to order military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities without congressional authorization. The New York Democrat declared the action a constitutional violation that could potentially drag America into prolonged conflict. Her statements came as lawmakers from both parties scrambled to respond to the strikes, which targeted Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and drew mixed reactions across the political spectrum.
In her statement, Ocasio-Cortez did not mince words about what she views as a clear constitutional breach. She characterized the strikes as reckless and warned they could have far-reaching consequences for American security and military involvement abroad. The progressive lawmaker has positioned the issue as fundamentally about congressional war powers and proper constitutional procedures rather than simply the merits of confronting Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
In the words of Dan Ackroyd on SNL @AOC YOU IGNORANT SLUT” The President has the full authority to do this. We have not declared war.
I hope you knew your cocktail recipes better than you know the constitution. RESIGN https://t.co/OdK9Y5Rmju
— 🇺🇸✨💥 💔Winks 💔🇮🇱💥✨🇺🇸 (@wink_nod) June 22, 2025
Republican Backlash and Accusations of Hypocrisy
Republican lawmakers swiftly condemned Ocasio-Cortez’s impeachment calls. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene led the charge, accusing AOC of hypocrisy for previously supporting military assistance to Ukraine while now objecting to actions against Iran. The exchange highlighted the partisan lens through which military actions are often viewed, with Republicans defending presidential authority when their party holds power while questioning similar authority during Democratic administrations.
“Shut up, you pathetic little hypocrite. YOU fully supported our military and IC running the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. And you VOTED to fund the Ukraine war under your president with dementia. You don’t get to play anti-war and moral outrage anymore.” – Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene
Representative Mike Lawler pointed out that Democrats did not pursue impeachment against President Obama for similar military actions during his administration. Dan Turrentine, a former aide to Hillary Clinton, echoed this sentiment by comparing Trump’s strikes to Obama’s operation against Osama bin Laden, which proceeded without explicit congressional approval. Senator James Lankford suggested that impeachment attempts would likely follow if Democrats regain control of Congress.
Shut up you pathetic little hypocrite.
YOU fully supported our military and IC running the proxy war against Russia in Ukraine.
And you VOTED to fund the Ukraine war under your President with dementia.
You don’t get to play anti-war and moral outrage anymore. https://t.co/v1xor2ARpa
— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) June 22, 2025
Bipartisan Divisions Over Military Authorization
The controversy has exposed rifts within both parties regarding presidential war powers. While most Republicans backed Trump’s decision, Representatives Thomas Massie and Warren Davidson questioned the constitutionality of the strikes. On the Democratic side, Senator John Fetterman and Representative Josh Gottheimer broke ranks to support the president’s actions, citing the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program and its status as a leading sponsor of terrorism.
“This was the correct move by POTUS; Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities.” – Senator John Fetterman
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has called for a war powers resolution vote, while House Republicans like Senator Tom Cotton praised the strikes for severely damaging Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. President Trump directly criticized Representative Massie for questioning his authority, stating that “MAGA doesn’t want him, doesn’t know him, and doesn’t respect him.” These exchanges reveal the complex nature of the debate that transcends simple partisan divides.
Constitutional Questions and Future Implications
The debate over Trump’s strikes on Iran has reignited longstanding constitutional questions about the division of war powers between Congress and the presidency. While the Constitution grants Congress the power to declare war, presidents have historically claimed authority to conduct limited military operations under their role as Commander-in-Chief. This tension has persisted through administrations of both parties, with lawmakers often adjusting their positions based on which party controls the White House.
Despite the heated rhetoric, an actual impeachment appears unlikely while Republicans control Congress. Democratic leaders have criticized the administration for only briefing Republican lawmakers before the strikes, and the CIA and intelligence officials are scheduled to brief Congress in a closed Senate Intelligence Committee meeting. The controversy underscores the continued polarization in American politics, particularly regarding national security and executive authority.