Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., defended his decision Wednesday to vote with Democrats on a war powers resolution aimed at limiting U.S. military involvement in Iran, saying that the Constitution requires Congress — not the president — to authorize war.
Paul, the lone GOP vote in favor of the resolution sponsored by Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., said his position was rooted in the framers’ intent and his concern over the lack of a formal congressional debate before recent U.S. military actions.
“Well, you know, the Constitution is pretty clear,” Paul stated. “The Founding Fathers said that they didn’t want the power to declare or initiate war to be with the president. They wanted it to be with Congress.”
The resolution ultimately failed 52-47, with Paul joining Democrats in an effort to require the removal of U.S. armed forces from hostilities against Iran that have not been explicitly authorized by Congress. The Senate has now rejected similar War Powers measures four times since the Iran conflict began Feb. 28, with Paul voting with Democrats on each occasion.
Paul argued that the U.S. has “skipped a very important constitutional step” by not holding a vote on whether to initiate military action. “So, the way you go to war constitutionally … is there has to be a debate in Congress, and Congress should vote to declare or to initiate war.”
Beyond constitutional concerns, Paul raised questions about whether Iran posed an imminent threat justifying unilateral presidential action. He pointed to recent intelligence assessments indicating no significant change in Iran’s nuclear posture. “I don’t think there was anything imminent here that couldn’t have had a debate and a vote in Congress,” Paul said.
Citing a recent House briefing from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Paul added that “the intelligence estimate of all of our intelligence agencies has not changed” and that there is “no evidence that there was a rush to create a bomb.”
Paul also questioned the administration’s shifting rationale for continued military operations, noting that officials previously said Iran’s nuclear capabilities had been “obliterated” following strikes in June 2025. “If they tell you something was obliterated and then they tell you they have to bomb it again and again … it is incumbent upon them to show you the evidence that something has changed,” he said.
Paul further warned about the potential financial burden of a prolonged conflict, arguing that conflict with Iran could cost hundreds of billions of dollars and weaken U.S. national security. “I think our biggest threat to our national security is our debt,” Paul stated. “So, I think spending another $500 [billion], $700 billion on a war in Iran is not in our national security. I think it makes us weaker.”
While expressing hope for freedom for the Iranian people, Paul cautioned against using military intervention as a means to reshape foreign governments. “I don’t think you can give people freedom,” he said. “It’s a recipe for bankruptcy for our country.”
