Cato Experts React to U.S. Attacks on Iran

President Donald Trump says the U.S. has begun “major combat operations” in Iran after Israel also said it ⁠had launched missile attacks against the country. 

In response, Cato foreign policy experts have released the following statements: 

Jon Hoffman, Research Fellow: 

Trump’s decision to bomb Iran is indefensible. This was not about preempting an imminent threat—it was a strategically misguided power play, with no discernible endgame. Vague objectives, inflated threat perceptions, and regime-change fantasies threaten to pull the United States into a costly war that Americans don’t want. The United States is barreling toward another Middle East crisis of its own making.

Brandan Buck, Research Fellow: 

The President’s use of military force in Iran risks drawing the United States into yet another open-ended conflict in the Middle East, with no plausible casus belli, no congressional authorization, and no clear conception of victory. This action contradicts the administration’s own national security strategy, which explicitly sought to shift American attention away from decades of “fruitless ‘nation-building’ wars.” Instead, the President is repeating the same pattern of strategic self-deceit that has ensnared his predecessors—promising limited action while inviting prolonged conflict.

Katherine Thompson, Senior Research Fellow: 

The President’s use of offensive military force against Iran is a clear and blatant overreach of executive authority. Under the Constitution, the power to take the nation to war belongs to the United States Congress. The President’s decision puts U.S. forces and bases in the region in the crosshairs of retaliation. Defending American personnel—and Israel—against sustained attacks beyond what we saw during Operation Midnight Hammer is poised to strain already finite U.S. defensive resources. War is not abstract. It costs American blood and treasure. The Founders placed the power to initiate it in Congress precisely to ensure those costs are confronted and debated before the country walks into battle.

Source:Cato Institute @ https://www.cato.org/blog/cato-experts-react-us-attacks-iran

FIRE sues Bondi, Noem for censoring Facebook group and app reporting ICE activity

  • The First Amendment protects the right to discuss, record, and criticize what law enforcement does in public.
  • The federal government strong-armed Apple and Facebook to remove ICE activity monitoring from company platforms.
  • It’s unconstitutional for the government to coerce private companies into censorship.

CHICAGO, Feb. 11, 2026 — Two concerned Midwesterners are fighting back after the platforms they created to report on public Immigration and Customs Enforcement activity were censored by government officials.

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is suing Attorney General Pam Bondi and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem on behalf of Kae Rosado and Mark Hodges, who respectively created a Facebook group and an app that hosted video footage of ICE operations to inform the public and hold our government accountable. 

“As U.S. citizens, we have the right to keep each other informed about what our government officials are doing and how they’re doing it,” said Mark, who developed an app called Eyes Up that allows users to store and view videos of ICE activity nationwide. “Government transparency and accountability are fundamental in a free society.”

Mark runs Kreisau Group, which aims to preserve evidence of governmental abuses of power. On his Eyes Up app, users can upload videos, record new videos, or access uploaded videos, which Eyes Up arranges on a map of the United States after Mark and his moderators review and approve each video. 

Kae, who has her own jewelry business, started a Facebook group in January 2025 after seeing fear in her community about the impact of ICE raids on daily life in Chicago. She and other small business owners noticed attendance dropping at community events where they’d set up shop. The aim of the group — “ICE Sightings – Chicagoland” — was for fellow small business owners, friends, and family to share information about ICE operations in Chicago. The group remained small until Sept. 2025, when ICE commenced and publicly touted an enforcement surge in Chicago dubbed “Operation Midway Blitz.”

Documenting and criticizing law enforcement are protected by the First Amendment, and it is unconstitutional for the government to coerce private companies like Apple and Facebook into censoring content on their behalf. However, in October, Bondi and Noem pressured Facebook to take down Kae’s group and Apple to remove Mark’s Eyes Up from its app store.

In a statement to Fox News, Bondi boasted on Oct. 2 that “We reached out to Apple today demanding they remove the ICEBlock app from their App Store — and Apple did so.” In fact, Apple had removed several ICE-related apps, including Eyes Up. Though Apple had closely examined and approved the app the month before, Apple now claimed that the app violated the app store’s prohibition on “mean-spirited” content.

Less than two weeks later, the same thing happened to Kae’s Facebook group. On Oct. 12, political activist Laura Loomer flagged Noem and Bondi in an X post identifying Kae’s group, falsely suggesting that it was “getting people killed.” Kae advocates nonviolence and created the group so members could stay informed and stay safe. She prohibited group members from posting anything threatening or promoting violence. Nevertheless, following outreach from Bondi’s Department of Justice, Facebook disabled her Facebook group the next day. Bondi claimed credit on X for the removal. 

Full Post @ Foundation for Individual Rights & Expression https://www.thefire.org/news/fire-sues-bondi-noem-censoring-facebook-group-and-app-reporting-ice-activity