RSS
The US Attack on Iran Was Legal
A satellite image shows airstrike craters over the underground centrifuge halls of the Natanz Enrichment Facility, following US airstrikes amid the Iran-Israel conflict, in Natanz County, Iran, June 22, 2025. Photo: Maxar Technologies/Handout via REUTERS
After June 21, when the US bombed critical nuclear sites in Iran, some members of Congress called the mission illegal. It appears the hostilities have ended for now. But the legality of “Operation Midnight Hammer” is still debated.
The question boils down to three issues: Was the US entitled under international law to enter the war? Did President Trump have authority under US law to order the use of military force? And did the undertaking comply with the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) requirement to protect nuclear facilities?
When a US ally is subject to an armed attack or “imminent” armed attack, the US may lawfully assist the ally’s defense. The authority for the intervention is enshrined in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, which guarantees “the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense.” The multinational military incursions in Kuwait in 1991 and Afghanistan in 2001 were considered valid acts of collective self-defense.
Israel suffered two forms of Iranian armed attack. Iran orchestrated armed attacks on Israelis for decades through terrorist proxy groups based in territories surrounding Israel. And Iran directly attacked Israel with two waves of missiles and drones in 2024. Meanwhile, Iran posed an imminent threat of attack because it was becoming a nuclear threshold state while obsessively threatening to annihilate Israel.
Iran observers are unsure how close the regime came to nuclear weaponization. The bomb-making task requires highly enriched uranium, a triggering device, and a delivery vehicle such as a ballistic missile. On April 17, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi warned that Iran had all the weaponizing “puzzle pieces” and was “not far” from putting them together.
Two months later the IAEA reported that Iran had illegally stockpiled over 400 kg of highly enriched uranium, enough to make several nuclear bombs. Estimates on the remaining time needed to complete the lethal puzzle ranged from months to a year.
Some critics of the American-Israeli collective self-defense welcomed the erasure of Iran’s nuclear facilities but insisted President Trump lacked authority to order the operation without a Congressional declaration of war under Article I of the Constitution. The executive and legislative branches of the US government have long debated the Constitutional power to declare war, and the courts have never resolved the standoff.
A 2016 Department of Justice report formalized the executive branch position on the Constitutional dispute. It defines “war” for the purposes of Article I as a prolonged and substantial military engagement. If there’s no war, there’s no need for a declaration of war. For example, the DOJ opined that a two-week air campaign involving 2,300 combat missions, and an air campaign involving over 600 missiles and precision-guided munitions, did not amount to wars.
Under the DOJ framework, the June 21 assault on Iran’s nuclear program was certainly not a war. The counterproliferation scheme involved just 75 precision guided weapons in a one-day surgical strike. Seven US Air Force B-2 stealth bombers in a “package” of 125 aircraft dropped less than 20 bombs on two nuclear sites, and a US submarine fired dozens of Tomahawk missiles at a third nuclear site. The pilots spent only two and a half hours in Iranian airspace.
Members of Congress who raised the Constitutional challenge also claim that the president violated the War Powers Resolution of 1973 (WPR). Under the WPR, the president may commit armed forces to “hostilities” only if there is a Congressional “declaration of war,” a “specific statutory authorization,” or a “national emergency” created by an attack on the US or its armed forces. Once the military action starts, the president must report to Congress within 48 hours and must stop the action within 60 days unless Congress gives its approval.
Presidents of both parties have repeatedly ignored the three WPR prerequisites to the use of military force. Congressional acquiescence was treated as consent. In the tacit understanding, a president may initiate armed force if it is more surgical than “war” as defined by the DOJ framework and it serves “important national interests.” Consistent with that policy, President Trump described the June 21 action as “a precision strike” that served “vital United States interests.” The vital US interest was the same one emphasized by every US president since 2003, when the IAEA first disclosed Iran’s clandestine plan to develop nuclear weapons. President Trump said the violently anti-Western regime must never acquire a nuclear bomb.
Assuming the US raid in Iran was validly authorized, the only remaining question is whether it was validly implemented. IAEA standards prohibit attacks on nuclear facilities “devoted to peaceful purposes.” Director General Grossi stressed this point in his June 13 Statement on the Situation in Iran, while calling for a diplomatic solution to the Israel-Iran conflict.
Significantly, the Statement did not say Iran’s nuclear facilities were peaceful. Nor did it accuse Israel of violating any IAEA rule. The military nature of Iran’s nuclear facilities made them legally targetable for attack.
It is not legally clear when a US president may wield military might. But based on the written law and past US practice, Operation Midnight Hammer was a valid use of force.
Joel M. Margolis is the Legal Commentator, American Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists, U.S. Affiliate of the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists. His 2021 book, The Israeli-Palestinian Legal War, analyzed the major legal issues in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Previously he worked as a telecommunications lawyer in both the public and private sectors.
The post The US Attack on Iran Was Legal first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
‘Fine Scholar’: UC Berkeley Chancellor Praises Professor Who Expressed Solidarity With Oct. 7 Attacks
University of California, Berkeley chancellor Dr. Rich Lyons, testifies at a Congressional hearing on antisemitism, in Washington, D.C., U.S., on July 15, 2025. Photo: Allison Bailey via Reuters Connect.
The chancellor of University of California, Berkeley described a professor who cheered the Oct. 7 Hamas massacre across southern Israel a “fine scholar” during a congressional hearing held at Capitol Hill on Tuesday.
Richard K. Lyons, who assumed the chancellorship in July 2024 issued the unmitigated praise while being questioned by members of the House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce, which summoned him and the chief administrators of two other major universities to interrogate their handling of the campus antisemitism crisis.
Lyons stumbled into the statement while being questioned by Rep. Lisa McClain (R-MI), who asked Lyons to describe the extent of his relationship and correspondence with Professor Ussama Makdisi, who tweeted in Feb. 2024 that he “could have been one of those who broke through the siege on October 7.”
“What do you think the professor meant,” McClain asked Lyons, to which the chancellor responded, “I believe it was a celebration of the terrorist attack on October 7.” McClain proceeded to ask if Lyons discussed the tweet with Makdisi or personally reprimanded him, prompting an exchange of remarks which concluded with Lyons’s saying, “He is a fine scholar.”
Lyon’s comment came after nearly three hours in which the group of university leaders — which included Dr. Robert Groves, president of Georgetown University, and Dr. Felix V. Matos Rodriguez, chancellor of the City University of New York (CUNY) — offered gaffe-free, deliberately worded answers to the members’ questions to avoid eliciting the kind of public relations ordeal which prematurely ended the tenures of two Ivy League presidents in 2024 following an education committee held in Dec. 2023.
Rep. McClain later criticized Lyons on social media, calling his comment “totally disgraceful.” She added, “Faculty must be held accountable and Jewish students deserve better.”
CUNY chancellor Rodriguez also triggered a rebuke from the committee members in which he was also described as a “disgrace.”
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, CUNY campuses have been lambasted by critics as some of the most antisemitic institutions of higher education in the United States. Last year, the US Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) resolved half a dozen investigations of antisemitism on CUNY campuses, one of which involved Jewish students who were pressured into saying that Jews are White people who should be excluded from discussions about social justice.
During Tuesday’s hearing Rodriguez acknowledged that antisemitic incidents continue to disrupt Jewish academic life, disclosing that 84 complaints of antisemitism have been formally reported to CUNY administrators since 2024. 15 were filed in 2025 alone, but CUNY, he said, has published only 18 students for antisemitic conduct. Rodriguez went on to denounce efforts to pressure CUNY into adopting the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel, saying, “I have repudiated BDS and I have said there’s no place for BDS at the City University of New York.”
Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) remarked, however, that Rodriguez has allegedly done little to address antisemitism in the CUNY faculty union, the Professional Staff Congress (PSC), which has passed several resolutions endorsing BDS and whose members, according to 2021 ruling rendered by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), discriminated against Professor Jeffrey Lax by holding meetings on Shabbat to prevent him and other Jews from attending them.
“The PSC does not speak for the City University of New York,” Rodriquez protested. “We’ve been clear on our commitment against antisemitism and against BDS.”
Later, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), whose grilling of higher education officials who appear before the committee has created several viral moments, rejected Rodriguez’s responses as disingenuous.
“It’s all words, no action. You have failed the people of New York,” she told the chancellor. “You have failed Jewish students in New York State, and it is a disgrace.”
Following the hearing, The Lawfare Project, legal nonprofit which provides legal services free of charge to Jewish victims of civil rights violations, applauded the education committee for publicizing antisemitism at CUNY.
“I am thankful for the many members of Congress who worked with us to ensure that the deeply disturbing facts about antisemitism at CUNY were brought forward in this hearing,” Lawfare Project litigation director Zipora Reich said in a press release. “While it is deeply frustrating to hear more platitudes and vague promises from CUNY’s leadership, we are encouraged to see federal lawmakers demanding accountability.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post ‘Fine Scholar’: UC Berkeley Chancellor Praises Professor Who Expressed Solidarity With Oct. 7 Attacks first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Huckabee Calls for Israeli Investigation Into ‘Criminal and Terrorist’ Killing of Palestinian-American in West Bank
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee looks on during the day he visits the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest prayer site, in Jerusalem’s Old City, April 18, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
U.S. Ambassador Mike Huckabee on Monday urged Israeli officials to swiftly investigate the killing of Saif Musallet, a 20-year-old American citizen who was allegedly beaten to death by Israeli settlers while he was visiting family in the West Bank town of Sinjil.
“There must be accountability for this criminal and terrorist act,” Huckabee wrote on social media, in what is one of his strongest condemnations of Israeli settler violence since he was appointed by President Donald Trump in November 2024. “Saif was just 20 yrs old.”
Musallet, a Florida native, was reportedly attacked on July 11 by a group of Israelis while accompanying relatives on family-owned farmland near Ramallah. His family says he was severely beaten and denied medical attention for nearly three hours before succumbing to his injuries. Another Palestinian man, 23-year-old Mohammad al-Shalabi, was shot and killed during the same incident, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry.
Israeli authorities said the violence followed an alleged rock-throwing incident that left two Israelis lightly wounded, a common occurrence in the West Bank which las left scores of Israelis civilians wounded and some killed. The Israel Defense Forces stated they used non-lethal crowd dispersal methods during the clash. The IDF says the incident is under investigation. Two Israeli minors were arrested following the attack, though according to Israeli media reports, neither of them is a murder suspect, and they were subsequently released to house arrest.
Musallet had traveled to the West Bank in early June to visit relatives and potentially meet a bride. Raised in Port Charlotte, Florida, he had recently co-founded an ice cream business in Tampa with his family. His death comes amid an escalation in settler-related violence across the West Bank, which has intensified since the October 2023 Hamas-led attack on southern Israel and the Israeli military’s ongoing campaign in Gaza.
Huckabee has historically defended Israeli settlement activity and has vowed to serve as an unwavering defender of the Jewish state.
Human rights groups and local activists say Musallet’s killing is part of a growing pattern of impunity for attacks on Palestinians, including American citizens. No Israeli suspects have been indicted in several high-profile deaths of Palestinian Americans in recent years, including journalist Shireen Abu Akleh and teenager Omar Mohammad Rabea.
U.S. lawmakers, including Representative Kathy Castor (D-FL), who represents Tampa, joined calls for an investigation. The State Department said it is aware of the incident and is providing consular support to the family but deferred further comment to Israeli authorities.
Musallet’s funeral was held Sunday in his family’s hometown of al-Mazra’a ash-Sharqiya. His relatives say they are demanding justice not only for Saif, but for all Americans caught in what they describe as an increasingly lawless situation in the occupied West Bank.
The post Huckabee Calls for Israeli Investigation Into ‘Criminal and Terrorist’ Killing of Palestinian-American in West Bank first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Scandal-Plagued UN Commission Disbands Amid Increasing US Pressure Against Anti-Israel International Organizations
Miloon Kothari, member of the United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel, briefs reporters on the first report of the Commission. UN Photo/Jean Marc Ferré
The Commission of Inquiry (COI), a controversial United Nations commission investigating Israel for nearly five years, has collapsed after all three of its members abruptly resigned days after the United States sanctioned a senior UN official over antisemitism.
Commission chair Navi Pillay resigned on July 8, citing health concerns and scheduling conflicts. Her fellow commissioners, Chris Sidoti and Miloon Kothari, followed suit days later. While none of the commissioners directly linked their resignations to the U.S. sanctions, the timing suggests mounting American pressure played a decisive role.
The resignations came just one day before the Trump administration announced sanctions on Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Palestinian territories. Albanese was sanctioned over what the State Department called a “pattern of antisemitic and inflammatory rhetoric.” She had previously claimed that the U.S. was controlled by a “Jewish lobby” and questioned Israel’s right to self-defense. The sanctions bar her from entering the U.S. and freeze any assets under American jurisdiction.
The resignations mark a major victory for critics who have long viewed the inquiry as biased and politically motivated.
Watchdog groups, including Geneva-based UN Watch, celebrated the swift collapse of the Commission of Inquiry (COI), which they say had long operated with an open mandate to target Israel. “This is a watershed moment of accountability,” said UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer. “The COI was built on bias and sustained by hatred. Its fall is a victory for human rights, not a defeat.”
The COI had faced heavy criticism since its formation in 2021. In July 2022, Commissioner Miloon Kothari, made comments about the undue influence of a so-called “Jewish lobby” on the media, said the COI would “have to look at issues of settler colonialism.”
“Apartheid itself is a very useful paradigm, so we have a slightly different approach, but we will definitely get to it,” he added.
The Commission was established in 2021 year following the 11-day war between Israel and Gaza’s ruling Hamas group in May. COI is the first UN commission to ever be granted an indefinite period of investigation, which has drawn criticism from the US State Department, members of US Congress, and Jewish leaders across the world.
Following the resignations, Council President Jürg Lauber invited member states to nominate replacements by August 31. However, it is unclear whether the commission will be reconstituted or quietly shelved. UN Watch and other groups have urged the council to disband the COI entirely, calling it irreparably biased.
The post Scandal-Plagued UN Commission Disbands Amid Increasing US Pressure Against Anti-Israel International Organizations first appeared on Algemeiner.com.