March 5th, 2026
The Maryland congressional delegation is raising a variety of concerns about the administration’s military campaign in the Middle East.
By STELLA GARNER
Capital News Service
(WASHINGTON) — Congress is conflicted on how to respond to the Trump administration’s ongoing military campaign in Iran, with lawmakers split largely along party lines on whether President Donald Trump’s actions abroad are on the right track.
The situation in the Maryland congressional delegation is no different. Every lawmaker, with the exception of sole Republican Rep. Andy Harris, has openly questioned the wisdom of Trump’s actions and pledged to reject any further military action without congressional review. Harris took to X to express his support for Trump.
“Gov. Moore and Maryland Democrats were willing to stand by and watch Iran continually threaten Israel’s destruction and sponsor worldwide radical Islamic terrorism,” Harris wrote. “Thank goodness President Trump is willing to stand up to evil forces in this world that threaten America.”
But Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) spoke out against the president’s military tactics in a speech on the Senate floor this week.
“President Trump has already ordered more military strikes against more countries than any president in the modern era, including countries that have never been targeted by the U.S. military,” Van Hollen said.
The primary barrage on Feb. 28 followed an Israeli strike that killed Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and hit over 1,000 targets in Iran within the following days. Iran launched retaliatory strikes spanning across Israel and several Gulf states.
The Trump administration has given various reasons for the attack, including that the strike was a preventative one against a planned Iranian attack on the United States. Van Hollen called this “a lie” in his floor speech.
Promises broken
Van Hollen and Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) are highlighting the president’s former campaign promises against entering any wars.
“The president said he would end wars – not start them. He lied,” Alsobrooks said. “The American people have no reason to trust this man with the lives of our sons and daughters.”
Reps. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.) and Johnny Olszewski (D-Md.) took aim against President Trump’s promise to end “forever wars,” a term that refers to military conflicts with no clear conclusion or end goal for the parties involved. The president said in a press conference Monday that the campaign was projected to last 4-5 weeks, but that the military had the “capability to go far longer than that.”
“You cannot campaign on ending ‘forever wars’ and then turn around and move us closer to one without a clear strategy, clear authorization, and clear answers,” Ivey said.
Lives lost
Van Hollen takes issue with potential human rights violations in some of the airstrikes, referencing a strike on an elementary school that killed 160 children.
“These killings should not be a surprise,” Van Hollen said.
Other Maryland lawmakers were concerned about the attack’s implications for American soldiers stationed in the Middle East – particularly after a retaliatory strike killed six service members at a command center in Kuwait.
“I’m thinking of our men and women in uniform who deserve clear answers and strategy, the American people who deserve assurance that we are not entering another forever war, and the Iranian people who deserve self-determination,” Rep. Sarah Elfreth said.
Rep. Kweisi Mfume condemned the strikes as endangering America by “killing innocent civilians overseas and risking the lives of our service personnel.”
Regime change
Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) praised the Trump administration’s actions on X, saying Khamenei had “met an appropriate fate” and panning Democratic lawmakers for their criticisms of the strikes.
But Harris’ comments got at something Democratic members agree with him on – the need for a regime change in Iran, even among lawmakers who don’t agree with Trump’s methods.
“The Iranian regime is, of course, a vicious theocratic tyranny like the brutal government in Saudi Arabia,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said, comparing Iran to the strategic U.S. partner whose crown prince visited the White House last November. “The world must hold these antidemocratic and illiberal regimes accountable for their documented human rights violations against their own populations, their oppression of the rights of women and their malicious support for terrorism.”
The Trump administration also cited Iran’s nuclear capabilities as a reason for the initial attacks, a concern that some Maryland lawmakers shared.
“I have been very clear that Iran must never obtain a nuclear weapon. As the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, it is in the security interests of the United States and our allies that Iran never possess the world’s most deadly and destructive technology,” Rep. April McClain Delaney (D-Md.) said. “But under the Constitution, only Congress can declare war.”
There are 5,225 nuclear warheads estimated to be possessed by the U.S. and 90 by Israel, according to the Arms Control Association.
Legal troubles
The crux of congressional conflict over the campaign lies with the fact that, under Article I of the Constitution, Congress has the power to declare war. Trump’s choice to strike without congressional approval could lead to a showdown in coming days, as lawmakers are teeing up resolutions to curb the administration’s actions.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) has introduced the Iran War Powers Resolution bill. Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Ca.) introduced a companion bill in the House.
“Defenders of the Constitution on both sides of the aisle must come together to rein in the reckless and lawless actions of the would-be king,” Raskin said. “American lives and security depend on our Constitution being respected.”
Will Hammann contributed to this report.
