Fact check: Did Biden drop bombs without congressional approval

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, yes, Biden has dropped bombs without explicit congressional approval. The evidence shows that in February 2024, President Joe Biden ordered the U.S. military to hit Houthi rebels in Yemen without congressional approval ^[1]. Additionally, Biden used the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) as legal rationale for a targeted killing of Iranian-backed militiamen in Iraq in 2024 ^[2].

The analyses reveal that Biden has cited both the 2002 AUMF and Article II constitutional powers when taking military actions against Iran-backed militant groups, which effectively bypasses the need for new congressional authorization ^[3].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks crucial historical and legal context that emerges from the analyses:

• Presidential military action without congressional approval has become routine practice across multiple administrations ^[4]. This is not unique to Biden but represents a broader pattern of executive power expansion.
• Legal justifications exist through existing authorizations: Presidents often rely on previous congressional authorizations like the 2002 AUMF rather than seeking new approval for each military action ^{[2] [3]}.
• Constitutional Article II powers: Presidents claim inherent authority under Article II of the Constitution to use military force for national defense purposes ^[3].
• The Biden administration has established formal policies regarding lethal force through Presidential Policy Memorandums (PPMs) that govern the use of force outside recognized battlefields ^[5].

Beneficiaries of different narratives:

• Military contractors and defense industry benefit from continued military interventions regardless of authorization processes
• Congressional members benefit from criticizing executive overreach when it serves partisan purposes
• Presidents of both parties benefit from maintaining broad executive war powers

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question, while factually answerable, contains potential bias through:

• Lack of historical context: The question implies this behavior is unusual or unprecedented, when the analyses show that presidents of both parties have launched military action without Congress declaring war ^[2].
• Missing comparative framework: The question doesn't acknowledge that Trump also ordered strikes in Iran without congressional approval ^[4], suggesting this is a systemic issue rather than Biden-specific.
• Oversimplification of legal framework: The question doesn't account for the complex legal justifications presidents use, including existing authorizations and constitutional powers, which may technically provide legal cover even without new congressional approval.

The framing could mislead readers into believing Biden's actions are uniquely problematic when the analyses demonstrate this represents routine presidential behavior across administrations.