What precedent exists to establish the legal criteria to claim an AUMF is unconstitutional? You can't point to any precedent because there aren't any, and it's farfetched to think that SCOTUS would even touch such a case. It would say it's a political matter because Congress can rescind the AUMF at any time if it disagrees. Another baseless libertardian argument.
Iran is not a threat to the US. Has never attacked or invaded its shores as per what is generally meant and how the framers would have seen it in the 1770s
Factually challenged: Iran has been kidnapping and killing Americans directly or indirectly since 1979. The notion that the President must wait until US territory is directly attacked is another Constitutional fantasy originating in the 60s. TR threatened to raze Casablanca to the ground because a single American was kidnapped.
As far as the Framers go, they had a much better understanding of the realities of power politics based on English history and their own experience of war and the threat of being hanged during the Revolution than just about any current legal theorists. Being quite familiar with the abuse of military authority, if they had wanted such minute restrictions on Presidential military powers, they would have made them explicit.
The Founders, contrary to the belief of many, were not libertarians. Like the left, libertarians like to dress up their own baseless opinions as Constitutional principles as a way to impose the opinions of a small minority on the whole country without passing laws, winning elections, or passing Constitutional amendments.
? You don’t get more explicit than only “Congress” can declare war and fund it !
This is what they had in mind during that period
Military action to repel an invasion of the United States. An Actual threat not an imagined one thousands of miles away ?
They wanted the Congress to debate and vote on issues like this they did not empower= the president with King like powers (I now hate this term/argument since the left has stolen it but you get my point )
I appreciate you feel strongly on this and making thoughtful points even though I think they’re wrong
Also the AUMF is like a resolution it’s not a serious document in my eyes and its been in tact for over 24 years. They can and do claim anything using it. I think it’s silly myself and should not be used as justification.