By: Fern Sidman

The reverberations of the United States’ unprecedented airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities continue to shake not only the geopolitical landscape but also the fault lines within American domestic politics. As the White House, the Pentagon, and key allies such as Israel hailed the strike as a critical blow to Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, one of the most vociferous voices of dissent emerged from Congress: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).

In a sharply worded post on X (formerly Twitter) Saturday night, Ocasio-Cortez denounced President Donald Trump’s decision to launch a surprise military operation targeting three of Iran’s most fortified nuclear enrichment sites—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan—as an “unauthorized” and “disastrous” escalation. “The President’s disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers,” she wrote. “He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment.”

The remarks triggered a tidal wave of criticism from conservative lawmakers, legal scholars, and national security experts who argue that the strikes were both legally justifiable and strategically vital. One of the most prominent rebuttals came from former U.S. Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, who wasted no time in responding.

“The president just saved millions of lives by eliminating the threat of a nuclear attack by a radical Islamist regime,” Friedman wrote. “He acted fully in accordance with law. The fact that you see this so negatively disqualifies you from serious leadership.”

As reported by Israel National News (INN), tensions between progressive Democrats and the pro-Israel bipartisan consensus have only widened during the recent escalation between Israel, Iran, and their regional proxies. Ocasio-Cortez, a central figure in the so-called “Squad” of progressive lawmakers, has long been a critic of both President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Her condemnation of Trump’s Iran strategy is seen by many as part of a larger ideological rift that has consumed the Democratic Party’s foreign policy platform in recent years.

INN has repeatedly covered the congresswoman’s past statements critical of the Jewish state. In a 2019 interview with Israel’s Channel 12 News, Ocasio-Cortez condemned Prime Minister Netanyahu and sought to distance criticism of Israel’s policies from accusations of antisemitism. “Criticizing the occupation is not antisemitic,” she insisted at the time.

But her rhetoric escalated in 2023 and 2024 amid Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza and increasing tensions with Iran. In March of this year, she accused Israel of committing “genocide” against Palestinians—a charge strongly rejected by Jerusalem and by legal scholars across the political spectrum. In a subsequent CNN interview, she defended her use of the term, claiming that the humanitarian situation in Gaza had “crossed the threshold of intent” required to justify its use under international law.

As INN highlighted at the time, Israeli and American officials alike accused her of recklessly misrepresenting the realities of the conflict. “Her words give dangerous cover to Hamas and other Iranian-backed terror groups,” an Israeli diplomatic source told Israel National News following her remarks.

While AOC’s statements have been applauded by some members of the progressive caucus, many experts argue that her invocation of “impeachment” is politically charged and legally tenuous. According to several constitutional scholars cited by INN, the War Powers Resolution of 1973 allows the President to act militarily in cases of urgent national security threats—especially when American interests or allies are at risk—provided that Congress is notified within 48 hours.

“The President has broad constitutional authority as Commander in Chief to conduct limited military strikes to protect U.S. national security,” said Alan Dershowitz in an interview with Israel National News. “What Trump did was entirely within the established legal framework. To suggest otherwise is a distortion of both law and precedent.”

In his national address Saturday night, Trump made the case for action unequivocally clear: “Our objective was the destruction of Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world’s number one state sponsor of terror.”

The INN report noted that the airstrikes—carried out with support from Israeli intelligence—were targeted with surgical precision to eliminate Iran’s nuclear infrastructure without endangering civilians. According to Israeli sources cited by INN, “The strikes were executed with real-time coordination between American and Israeli command centers.”

While AOC and her allies denounced the military action, Israel responded with resounding praise. “President Trump and I often say: ‘Peace through strength.’ First comes strength, then comes peace,” said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, quoted by INN following the announcement.

Former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant also praised the U.S. operation, telling INN that “this decisive action sends a clear message to every regime that threatens Israel with annihilation—it will not be tolerated.”

Danny Danon, Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, echoed that sentiment. “Tonight, President Trump proved that ‘Never Again’ is not just a slogan. It’s a policy,” he told INN. “Iran’s nuclear ambitions have been checked, and that gives the world a moment to breathe.”

The incident has once again laid bare the deep divisions in U.S. politics over Israel, Iran, and the use of American military force abroad. While the bulk of Republican lawmakers have stood firmly behind Trump’s decision, several Democratic figures—particularly those aligned with the progressive left—have voiced concerns about escalation and constitutional overreach.

Still, as the INN report observed, even among Democrats, AOC’s impeachment rhetoric is seen by some as overstepping. “There are legitimate debates to be had about war powers and foreign policy,” one senior Democratic Senate aide told INN, “but calling for impeachment after a legally justified military action against a genocidal regime? That’s not leadership—it’s political provocation.”

The White House has not officially responded to AOC’s impeachment claims, but insiders speaking to INN noted that the President remains undeterred. Trump, now riding a wave of bipartisan support for the operation, has reportedly directed the Pentagon to monitor Iranian retaliation closely while keeping additional targets on standby.

“If Iran chooses to respond with more terror,” he warned on Saturday, “they will receive more destruction than they have ever known.”