Fact check: Has Biden ever been sued for unauthorized use of military force?

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, there is no evidence that Biden has been sued for unauthorized use of military force. None of the sources examined contain any mention of lawsuits specifically targeting Biden for unauthorized military actions ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]}.

The sources do reveal that Biden has taken military actions while citing legal justifications. Biden ordered strikes in Iraq and Syria in 2021, citing Article II powers ^[5]. He also used the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) as legal rationale for targeted killings of Iranian-backed militiamen in Iraq ^[6]. Additionally, Biden cited both the AUMF of 2002 and Article II powers when taking military actions against Iran-backed militant groups ^[4].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks important context about the routine nature of presidential military actions without explicit congressional approval. Presidents of both parties have regularly launched military actions without Congress' approval, and this has become routine practice ^{[5] [6]}. The sources indicate there are ongoing constitutional tensions between presidential and congressional war powers, particularly highlighted by Biden's military campaign against Yemen's Houthis ^[7].

An important missing perspective is that Biden actually supported more congressional oversight of military actions and backed the repeal of authorizations that previous presidents had used to justify military interventions ^[6]. This suggests Biden may be more restrained in his use of military force compared to predecessors.

The analyses also reveal that while Biden hasn't been sued for unauthorized military force, his administration has faced other legal challenges, including defending a Trump-era policy that blocked military service members' expedited path to citizenship ^[1] and dealing with Texas's successful challenge to vaccine mandates for National Guard members ^[3].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question appears neutral on its surface, but it may carry an implicit assumption that Biden has engaged in unauthorized military actions worthy of lawsuits. The framing could suggest wrongdoing where none has been legally established through the court system.

The question also lacks acknowledgment that presidential military actions without explicit congressional approval are standard practice across administrations ^{[5] [6]}. This omission could mislead readers into thinking such actions are uniquely problematic or unusual for Biden specifically.

Furthermore, the question doesn't recognize the complex legal framework surrounding presidential war powers, including existing authorizations like the 2002 AUMF that presidents regularly invoke ^{[4] [6]}, or the ongoing constitutional debate about the limits of presidential military authority ^{[5] [4]}.