President Trump ordered air strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, an act viewed by some as a constitutional overreach.

The strikes have sparked debate about presidential war powers and the War Powers Act of 1973.

Public opinion polls showed low support for military action against Iran before the strikes.

The air strikes have raised concerns about escalating tensions and unintended consequences in the region.

Bipartisan resolutions in Congress aim to limit Trump’s authority regarding military actions in Iran.

Let’s start with the obvious: It can come as no surprise that President Donald Trump willfully – gleefully, even – violated the U.S. Constitution when he ordered bombers to drop “bunker busting” munitions on Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities Saturday, June 21.

Trump’s second term in the White House has been a slapdash streak of constitutional overreaches, forcing federal judges from district courts to the U.S. Supreme Court to order him to obey the law.

But this also comes as no surprise because American presidents, Democrats and Republicans, have a long history of paying little heed to the section of our Constitution that specifically grants Congress the power to declare war. That’s been the law of our land since the Constitution was ratified more than 200 years ago.

Say whatever you like about the motivation – and there are some fine arguments being made for containing Iran’s nuclear program – but dropping more than a dozen 30,000 pound bombs on another country is an act of war.

American presidents have also played fast and loose in the past five decades with the War Powers Resolution, passed by Congress in 1973 in reaction to our military being committed to far away battlegrounds without congressional approval. Congress overrode a veto from then-President Richard Nixon to create that law, requiring a president to alert the House and Senate within 48 hours of military hostilities and then end them in 60 days unless Congress approves.

Need a break? Play the USA TODAY Daily Crossword Puzzle.

Let’s stop here to ponder all the absurdities that can happen in a Trump administration in 60 days.

What can Trump do in 60 days? A terrifying amount.

Here’s a refresher: 60 days ago, Trump was passing his 100th day in office and was still floating the notion of seeking a third term, which the Constitution also prohibits, even as his approval rating was tanking.

What will Trump be doing 60 days from now? If the question doesn’t concern you, then you haven’t been paying attention.

Trump’s approval rating tanks: Trump pivots to distractions as polls show collapsing support for his agenda | Opinion

Speaking of polling, dropping bombs on Iran was not something Americans were clamoring for. An Economist/YouGov Poll released four days before Trump ordered the mission found that just 16% of Americans supported military action against Iran, while 60% opposed it and 24% were not sure. Among Trump’s own party, 53% of Republicans opposed it.

That’s not to say Americans are fans of the Islamic theocracy that rules Iran. And they shouldn’t be. Half of the Americans polled found that repressive regime to be an enemy of our country, while just 5% saw Iran as an ally.

Preventing Iran from refining weapons-grade uranium to build a nuclear weapon is a sensible foreign policy, one that has been supported by past presidents regardless of political party. Even so, despite Trump’s predictable claims of victory after the bombing run, it seems nobody but Iran is really sure where that country’s stockpile of uranium is right now.

Like Neocons before him, Trump might have hung the “mission accomplished” banner prematurely.

That’s not the only messaging Trump mucked up here. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio spent the weekend telling Americans that the Trump administration was not attacking Iran to force regime change. Trump, just a few hours later, made it clear he is wide open to the idea of regime change in Iran.

Vance also stepped into a deep hole when talking about Iran after the bombs dropped. In a June 22 interview on NBC News’ “Meet The Press,” the vice president tried to soothe the rancor stirring among many Trump supporters who backed him for his pledge of ending “forever wars” by saying American military troubles in the Middle East in the past 25 years were due to “dumb presidents.”

Two questions for the vice president. First, does he remember that Trump was president during four of those 25 years? And second, why does his knowledge of history only go back 25 years?

Congress needs to wake up now, not in 60 days

Iran had a democratically elected prime minister who led a secular government and a thriving nation until he dared to anger the American and British governments by seeking to control his country’s oil industry. The CIA staged a coup in 1953, with the approval of then-President Dwight Eisenhower, a Republican, that installed a dictator who was so corrupt and brutal that he inspired the Islamic revolution that seized control of that country and still rules there today.

Historians call that unintended consequences.

And Trump’s bombing of Iran has sparked bipartisan concern about just that in Congress, with resolutions gaining traction in the House and in the Senate to force Trump “to remove United States Armed Forces from unauthorized hostilities” in Iran.

Some consequences are predictable. Iran fired missiles at an American military base in Qatar two days after our bombs dropped on their country. And protesters took to the streets in America, demanding that Trump stand down in his unlawful war against Iran.

Maybe this will de-escalate from here. Maybe this will get worse. Trump, two days after the bombs dropped, announced that Iran and Israel, which started the attacks on Iran two weeks ago, will now start phasing in a ceasefire.

This, of course, is the same Trump who, while proudly announcing the bombings on June 21, demanded that Iran make peace. That sort of obvious disconnect from rational thinking is troubling.

That’s why members of Congress, who for the past five months have surrendered their authority as a coequal branch of government, need to step up like the federal courts have and force Trump to follow the law. And not 60 days from now. Right now.

Follow USA TODAY columnist Chris Brennan on X, formerly known as Twitter: @ByChrisBrennan. Sign up for his weekly newsletter, Translating Politics, here.