Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution indicates that Congress has the power to declare war. On the other hand, Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution identifies the President as the “Commander-in-Chief” of all U.S. military forces. Traditionally, this has been interpreted to mean that only the Congress can declare war, and that once that is done, the President will be responsible for leading those military activities.
This distinction has also been interpreted to mean that the President can take steps to act defensively of the national interests, but cannot take preemptive military action. In other words, under the U.S. Constitution, the President is only authorized to repel invasions and sudden
attacks without a formal Congressional declaration of war. Any undeclared offensive military actions are not executive branch powers.
As I said, this is a novel interpretation that arose during the Vietnam War. It would mean an enemy could line up forces along a US border and unless Congress acts the President would not be legally authorized to act until we were actually attacked, which is nonsense on stilts.
I can't think of any American President accepting this line of reasoning in over two centuries.
The Founders thought the power of the purse would constrain any large-scale Presidential adventurism, as it largely did until after WWII. What they were primarily concerned about was Presidential abuse of indictments for treason, for which there was plenty of evidence in English history. The declaration clause is clearly tied to limiting the power of the Federal government to make accusations of treason.
What Congress can't do is fund a large military and then try to exercise command authority over the military by controlling the sharing of intelligence or other dispositions of the military forces under the President's command. If it doesn't like what the President is doing, Congress can always cut the budget or impeach the President.
The Founders were wise enough to know that if Congress voted $700 billion for defense because of the magnitude of perceived threats, the last thing anyone would want is that bunch of corrupt gasbags interfering with the use of the military forces they paid for.
so if putin attacks a us ship in response to these intelligence leaks biden can go all in?