Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Trump Takes U.S. to War

Trump Takes U.S. to War

U.S. President Donald Trump delivers an address to the nation accompanied by U.S. Vice President JD Vance, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth from the White House on June 21, 2025, in Washington, D.C.

Photo by Carlos Barria - Pool/Getty Images

Washington — President Donald Trump announced Saturday evening that the United States had launched strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities, describing the operation as a "spectacular military success."

In a televised address, he stated that key Iranian nuclear enrichment sites had been "completely and totally obliterated". He warned that any future attacks would be "far greater and a lot easier."


Trump also acknowledged Israeli cooperation in the operation, thanking Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli military. “We worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before, and we’ve gone a long way to erasing this horrible threat to Israel,” he said.

LIVE: Trump addresses nation after US strikes on Iran nuclear facilities www.youtube.com

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the President, "Congratulations, President Trump. Your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities with the awesome and righteous might of the United States will change history." Netanyahu also said that Trump's leadership has created a "pivot of history that can help lead the Middle East and beyond to a future of prosperity and peace".

Reactions from U.S. lawmakers were divided, with some praising the move while others condemned it.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) voiced strong support, stating, “The regime in Iran, which has committed itself to bringing ‘death to America’ and wiping Israel off the map, has rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace. The mullahs’ misguided pursuit of nuclear weapons must be stopped."

“Donald Trump promised to bring peace to the Middle East. He has failed to deliver on that promise," Democrat House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a statement. "The risk of war has now dramatically increased, and I pray for the safety of our troops in the region who have been put in harm’s way,” Jeffries added that Trump “misled the country about his intentions.”

What authority does the president have or need to launch such a strike?

John B. Bellinger III, an adjunct senior fellow for international and national security law at the Council on Foreign Relations made these comments:

Whether President Trump has legal authority under U.S. domestic law or international law is highly debatable. As I explained in a testimony [PDF] to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2017, when President Trump was threatening the use of force against North Korea, the president has broad authority under the Constitution to order the use of military force.

His Article II powers include authority not only to order the use of military force to defend the United States and U.S. persons against actual or anticipated attacks, but also to advance other important national interests. Presidents of both parties have deployed U.S. forces and ordered the use of military force, without congressional authorization, on numerous occasions.

In addition to the powers granted to the president in Article II, Article I of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to “declare War.” But this authority has never been interpreted—by either Congress or the executive branch—to require congressional authorization for every military action that the president could initiate.

President Trump’s decision to directly engage the United States in the conflict follows over a week of hostilities between Israel and Iran. Israeli officials have stated their airstrikes target Iran’s nuclear program, which they claim is aimed at developing weapons.

Iran’s nuclear agency acknowledged the attacks but vowed to continue its operations. "Our work will not be halted," the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran declared.

According to Iran’s health ministry, Israeli strikes have killed at least 400 people and wounded 3,000. Meanwhile, Israel reports 24 fatalities from Iran’s retaliatory attacks.

The U.S. intervention marks a significant escalation, with global repercussions still unfolding.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum, and the publisher of the Latino News Network.


Read More

Congress Bill Spotlight: Banning Trump Administration From Renaming Naval Ship Harvey Milk

View of the United States Navy's amphibious warfare command ship "USS Mount Whitney" in the Rostock Port on June 3, 2025 in Rostock, Germany.

Getty Images, Frank Soellner

Congress Bill Spotlight: Banning Trump Administration From Renaming Naval Ship Harvey Milk

Sean Penn won the Best Actor Academy Award for 2008’s film Milk, even beating out Brad Pitt.

Context

Keep ReadingShow less
Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The Protect Reporters from Excessive State Suppression (PRESS) Act aims to fill the national shield law gap by providing two protections for journalists.

Getty Images, Manu Vega

Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The First Amendment protects journalists during the news-gathering and publication processes. For example, under the First Amendment, reporters cannot be forced to report on an issue. However, the press is not entitled to different legal protections compared to a general member of the public under the First Amendment.

In the United States, there are protections for journalists beyond the First Amendment, including shield laws that protect journalists from pressure to reveal sources or information during news-gathering. 48 states and the District of Columbia have shield laws, but protections vary widely. There is currently no federal shield law. As of 2019, at least 22 journalists have been jailed in the U.S. for refusing to comply with requests to reveal sources of information. Seven other journalists have been jailed and fined for the same reason.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrat Donkey is winning arm wrestling match against Republican elephant

AI generated image

Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrats are quietly building momentum in the 2025 election cycle, notching two key legislative flips in special elections and gaining ground in early polling ahead of the 2026 midterms. While the victories are modest in number, they signal a potential shift in voter sentiment — and a brewing backlash against Republican-led redistricting efforts.

Out of 40 special elections held across the United States so far in 2025, only two seats have changed party control — both flipping from Republican to Democrat.

Keep ReadingShow less
Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

A DC Metropolitan Police Department car is parked near a rally against the Trump Administration's federal takeover of the District of Columbia, outside of the AFL-CIO on August 11, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

President Trump announced the activation of hundreds of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., along with the deployment of federal agents—including more than 100 from the FBI. This comes despite Justice Department data showing that violent crime in D.C. fell 35% from 2023 to 2024, reaching its lowest point in over three decades. These aren’t abstract numbers—they paint a picture of a city safer than it has been in a generation, with fewer homicides, assaults, and robberies than at any point since the early 1990s.

The contradiction could not be more glaring: the same president who, on January 6, 2021, stalled for hours as a violent uprising engulfed the Capitol is now rushing to “liberate” a city that—based on federal data—hasn’t been this safe in more than thirty years. Then, when democracy itself was under siege, urgency gave way to dithering; today, with no comparable emergency—only vague claims of lawlessness—he mobilizes troops for a mission that looks less like public safety and more like political theater. The disparity between those two moments is more than irony; it is a blueprint for how power can be selectively applied, depending on whose power is threatened.

Keep ReadingShow less